9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on merits. Keeping in view of the factual matrix of the case and in the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that the matter needs to be set aside and restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication of the issue on merits by learned CIT(A) . The ld. CIT(A) is directed to give one more opportunity to the assessee to represent the case before him - I .T.A. No. 2282/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 20-4-2017 - SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : None For The Revenue : Shri B. Satyanarayana Raju, DR ORDER PER RAMIT KOCHAR, Accountant Member This appeal, filed by the assessee, being ITA No. 2282/Mum/2016, is directed against the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the TDS deducted to the credit of the central government. 3. The finding of learned AO that appellant has not disclosed that TDS has not paid is wrong and without looking into the facts that same is reported in Annexure-D of tax audit report u/s 44AB. 4. The CIT(A) has confirmed the penalty without looking into the fact that appellant was in financial difficulties and hence could not deposit the tax deducted at source into the government account. 5. Without prejudice to above, the learned CIT(A) AO has erred in not considering the alternate plea that in appellant case, the tax sought to be evaded was NIL as the appellant has not claimed carry forward of loss due to belated return. 6. The appellant could not attend the bearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alary 1,06,036/- 10,60,360/- 4 TDS on contractor 1,31,086/- 65,54,300/- Total 2,09,30,565/- The A.O. while passing the assessment order dated 27-03-2014 u/s 143(3) of 1961 Act had made disallowance of ₹ 2,09,30,565/- as per provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of 1961 Act for non-deposit of tax deducted at source with Central Government . The AO also initiated penalty proceedings against the assessee u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for filing inaccurate particulars of income. Accordingly show cause notice wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being 100% of the tax sought to have been concealed to the tune of ₹ 62,79,110/-, vide penalty orders dated 23-09-2014 passed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of 1961 Act. 4. Aggrieved by the penalty order dated 23-09-2014 passed by the A.O. u/s 271(1)(c) of 1961 Act, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issue of notices by learned CIT(A) fixing the appeal for hearing from time to time nor the assessee filed any written submissions before learned CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) after considering the material available on record, confirmed the penalty of ₹ 62,79,110/- levied by the A.O. u/s 271(1)(c) of 1961 Act in an ex-parte proceedings by holdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee has claimed that it had deducted the tax at source but failed to pay the same in the Government s account due to financial difficulties faced by the assessee. In the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not make any appearance and the averment of the assessee as contained in Ground No. 6 filed with the tribunal was that because of the illness of its authorized representative , the assessee could not make representation before the ld. CIT(A) and it is prayed that one more opportunity be provided to the assessee to present its case on merits. Keeping in view of the factual matrix of the case and in the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that the matter needs to be set aside and restored back to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
