2019 (5) TMI 280 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal allows delayed appeal filing, remits penalty issue for reconsideration under Income Tax Act.

The Tribunal condoned the delayed filing of the appeal due to sufficient cause and allowed the appeal for adjudication. Regarding the penalty under ... Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - appeal against quantum addition remanded by ITAT - Proof of concealment of particulars of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income assessable to tax - as alleged assessee has not admitted bank account with Lakshmi Vilas Bank, Sankarapuram in its books of account and in turn in the balance sheet - HELD THAT:- As against the quantum addition, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Tribunal and vide order [2017 (8) TMI 1532 - ITAT CHENNAI] the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the file of AO for fresh consideration, we are of the considered opinion that the issue of levy of penalty needs to be remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after deciding the quantum. We remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after allowing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Issues: Delayed filing of appeal, Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961Delayed Filing of Appeal:The appellant's appeal was delayed by 516 days. The appellant's counsel filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay, which the ld. DR did not object to. The Tribunal condoned the delay as the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause, admitting the appeal for adjudication.Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The case involved the concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars by the assessee. The Assessing Officer made an addition to the income during assessment proceedings, which was further enhanced by the ld. CIT(A). Subsequently, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the bank account in question was not reflected in the assessee's books of account, leading to the imposition of the penalty. The appellant argued that since the quantum addition was pending before the ITAT, the penalty levy was not maintainable. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions, remitted the penalty issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after deciding the quantum addition. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.In summary, the judgment addressed the delayed filing of the appeal and the imposition of a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and remitted the penalty issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after deciding the quantum addition.