9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the office of the AO for providing one last opportunity to the assessee to explain before the AO why the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act should not be imposed. Accordingly, the AO is directed to adjudicate the issue of imposition of penalty de novo. Apeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the penalty order dated 28.03.2017 of the AO passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee for the reason of non-compliance by the Assessee, vide order dated 23.04.2018. 6. Aggrieved by the order dated 23.04.2018, the assessee moved a rectification application under section 154 of the Act before the ld. CIT(A)-I, Kanpur, stating therein that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) for the reason of non-appearance and non-compliance to the notice of hearing, which is a mistake on the face of record and need rectification. However, the ld. CIT(A) rejected the application moved by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainly when assesses has given all the information as required by the assessing officer much before the completion of assessment. Learned A.O. has imposed penalty without concrete finding and evidence without giving any opportunity to assessee of being hearing which is against principle of natural justice. 2. Learned AO has ignored the facts and evidence that amount shown as unrecoverable from a Debtor Rajhans Gramoudyog written off in books of account and debited in Rebate and claims of Rs. 2,97,452 does not change the basis character of transaction as nothing has been concealed hence penalty provision does not apply and penalty is imposed against law and natural justice. 3. Learned Assessing officer is not justified in treating the rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and letter and order rejecting the appeal is served at the incorrect address which is also mistake on record and self-evidence. 6. That the assessee has filed application u/s 154 on 1.5.2018 with the CIT Appeal-1, Kanpur and in grievance with Pr.CIT UP and Uttaranchal even than the CIT appeal has ignored the vital evidence and passed order dated 19.2.2019 served on 2.4.2019 that too is showing incorrect address not belonging to the appellant messing up the entire request and left us to request and take shelter of your honour. 7. That the honorable apex court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. Joint CIT (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC) has held that if there is no evidence on material to show that the assessee had deliberately furnished inaccurat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... First Appellate Authority was dismissed for want of prosecution. From the facts of the case and the sequence of events, it is evident that the appeal of the assessee cannot be adjudicated on merits at this stage. Although the assessee has been a chronic defaulter and seems to have taken proceedings before the Tribunal in a casual manner, all the same in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the office of the AO for providing one last opportunity to the assessee to explain before the AO why the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act should not be imposed. Accordingly, the AO is directed to adjudicate the issue of imposition of penalty de novo. I also caution the Assessee to fully comply with the directions of the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
