S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Bogus purchases-Estimate of income-Ex-parte order-Penalty is deleted-Tribunal also observed that when the necessary facts and circumstances and material on the basis of which, the issue in the appeal has to be decided, are already on record, this Tribunal would be slow in directing such remand which may ultimately lead to multiplicity of proceedings. [S. 250]
The Assessing Officer levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, in respect of alleged bogus purchases which was estimated at 12.5% by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal . On appeal the CIT (A) passed an ex parte order dismissing the appeal. On appeal against the ex-prate order, the Tribunal held that normally, when the order of the First Appellate court is an ex parte order, wherein the assesse is not found to be at fault, Tribunal would be inclined to remand the matter back to the First Appellate court. However, when the necessary facts and circumstances and material on the basis of which, the issue in the appeal has to be decided, are already on record, this Tribunal would be slow in directing such remand which may ultimately lead to multiplicity of proceedings. In the present case, the Tribunal found that the circumstances which are relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue involved are matters of record and, accordingly the matter is decided on merit. Tribunal following the ratio in ITO v. Krishi Tyre Retreading & Rubber Industries (2014) 360 ITR 580 (Raj)(HC) CIT v. Whitelene Chemicals (2014) 360 ITR 385 ( Guj)( HC) , wherein the Courts have held that when the income is estimated levy of penalty is not justified. Accordingly the Tribunal deleted the penalty. (ITA NO. 2734/MUM/2023 dt. 6-12-2023)(AY. 2011-12)
Dombivali Paper Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (Mum.)(Trib.) www.itatonline .org
[Coram : Hon’ble Justice (Retd.) Shri C. V. Bhadang, President and Hon’ble Shri B.R. Baskaran, A.M.]