2023 (8) TMI 721

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t principles of natural justice. 2. That the learned Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in levying penalty of Rs. 981000. 3. That the Appellant craves the right to add, amend, delete or substitute the Ground of Appeal at any time before the finalization of appeal proceedings." 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) without giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee, proceeded to dismiss the appeal. He submitted that in the interest of principle of natural justice, the assessee should have been given opportunity for representing his case. 4. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that the assessee has b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder of the AO is erroneous. 5.4 In the case of Anil Goel Vs CIT, [2008] 306 ITR 212 (Punjab & Haryana), the Hon'ble High Court held as under. "4. It is thus obvious on the plain language of section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by appearing in person or through authorised representative. Despite fixing the case for seventeen hearings, no one had put in appearance nor any justifiable reason for adjournment was given. 5. The Tribunal also found that non-recording of reasons in support of order passed by CIT(A) would not amount to committing any illegality becaus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndly, the appellant before the A.O. relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Netambit Value First Pvt Lt Vs DCIT (2018 (3) TMI 36-Hon'ble ITAT Delhi). On perusal of the case, it was noticed that hon'ble Tribunal had allowed relief from penalty where disallowance was made u/s 40a(ia). It was not a case that the payments were doubted rather payments were made without TDS, which attracted disallowance u/s 40a(ia). The case of the appellant is entirely different. The appellant claimed expenses and no details of the expenses were available making the entire expenses as bogus. Thus the case law cited by the appellant before the A.O., was not applicable in the appellant's case. Thus the appellant had not fi....