Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2024) 02 ITAT CK 0005

Parmod Kumar vs ITO

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 2 February 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shamim Yahya, (AM)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Income Tax Appeal No. 3533/DEL/2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 360 words
1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 08.11.2023 for the Assessment Year 2011-12.

2.

Although assessee has raised various issues, ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that this appeal is against the penalty levied and confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).

3.

Ld. Counsel pleaded that in the quantum appeal in assessee’s own case, the matter has been remanded by the ITAT to the file of AO. Hence, he submitted that penalty order should also be remanded to the AO for consideration afresh.

4.

Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any objection to this proposition.

5.

Upon careful consideration, I find that this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in quantum appeal has concluded as under :-

“ Considering the totality of the facts and the material placed before me, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the AO had applied profit rate @ 25% of the gross receipts, meaning thereby the AO has treated the cash deposit into the bank accounts as business receipts of the assessee. Hence, the AO, in my considered view, ought to have examined the past history and the profit declared by similarly situated assessees. Under these facts the orders of the authorities below cannot be sustained. Hence, I hereby set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment to the file of the AO to make assessment afresh, in accordance with law, after making due inquiry regarding business carried out by the assessee and also take into consideration the past history of the profit declared by the assessee. Needless to say, the AO will provide adequate opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.”

Since the quantum appeal has been remanded to the AO, I also deem it appropriate to remand this issue to the file of AO. Needless to add, assessee should be granted adequate opportunity of being heard.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.