Sunita Ashokabhai Sharma Vs ITO (ITAT Rajkot)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Rajkot, addressed appeals filed by Sunita Ashokabhai Sharma against penalty orders issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 271(1)(b), 271A, and 271F of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The appeals challenged the ex parte orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)/NFAC] which arose from these penalty orders. A key contention by the assessee’s counsel was the delay in filing the appeals, attributed to the Income Tax Department serving notices and appellate orders to an incorrect email address (‘[email address removed]’) instead of the registered email (‘[email address removed]’). The assessee only became aware of these orders upon receiving recovery notices. The ITAT acknowledged the validity of this reason, condoned the delay, and admitted the appeals for hearing.
On the merits of the case, the assessee’s counsel pointed out that the quantum proceedings related to ITA No. 567/Rjt/2024 had already been restored back to the AO by the Tribunal. Consequently, it was argued that the penalty proceedings should also be remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication based on the outcome of the quantum proceedings. The ITAT concurred with this view, setting aside the CIT(A)’s orders and remitting the penalty matters back to the AO. The Tribunal reasoned that once the quantum proceedings are re-examined and a fresh assessment order is issued, the AO would be in a position to initiate penalty proceedings afresh, if warranted, in accordance with the law and after providing the assessee with a fair opportunity to be heard. Thus, the appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, directing the assessee to promptly submit all necessary documents and evidence to the AO.
