TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1227
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 'the Act') for AYs 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 dated 24.12.2024, which have been passed against the assessment orders u/s penalty u/s 271D of the Act, dated 28.12.2022. Since the issues in all the four appeals are common, they were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity 2. We will take up the appeal for A.Y. 2018-19 first. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: I. I.T.A. No: 376; AY 2018-19: "1. Quantum Appeal Pending: The penalty order under Section 271DA has been passed and confirmed without considering the fact that the quantum appeal against the assessment order is still pending before the CIT(A). The appellant c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of this request is contrary to established judicial precedents 6 Any Other Grounds: The appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter, or modify any of the above grounds before or during the course of the appeal hearing." 2.1 Similarly worded Grounds of appeal have been raised in the remaining three appeals as well. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and was searched on 05/11/2020 u/s 132 of the Act and assessment u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 was completed on 24/03/2022. The assessee, being aggrieved with the assessment made, preferred an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Meanwhile, the Ld. AO had initiated the penalty proceedings fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the Ld. AR that proper representation could not be made and the appeal was delayed as the assessee was in jail yet the delay was not condoned by the Ld. CIT(A). A perusal of the appeal order shows that before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee raised 3 issues as under: 1. That the appellant was in prison. 2. No intimation of such penalty order u/s 271 DA was received on his email id [email protected] which is the registered email for the e-filing portal of Income Tax. 3. Also, it was informed that no physical delivery of the order was acknowledged from our end. 5.1 The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the last 2 contentions after verifying the facts and in respect of the assessee being in prison he noted that there had been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Ld. CIT(A). It is an undisputed fact that the assessee was under arrest and therefore, even his son was finding it difficult to access the emails and submit the reply. Thus, there was sufficient cause within the meaning of sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act and the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal on account of delay alone without discussing the merits of the case. At the same time, the penalty under section 271DA has been imposed for violation of the provisions of section 269ST of the Act, which is imposed for the default of receiving cash exceeding Rs. 2,00,000/- as per the provisions of section 269ST and is independent of the assessment of income in the assessment order against which the appeal was pending. ....