Hebsiba Daniel Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Bangalore ITAT Condones 52-Day Delay in Section 270A Penalty Appeal: Directs CIT(A) to Decide Penalty Along With Quantum Appeal
The assessee, who was pursuing studies and subsequently residing in Canada, faced additions relating to an alleged ₹23.12 lakh gift from her husband and unexplained expenditure under Section 69C towards purchase of foreign currency/remittances. The AO subsequently levied penalty under Section 270A for under-reporting of income at 50% of the tax payable.
The assessee’s appeal against the penalty was filed before the CIT(A) with a delay of 52 days, which the CIT(A) refused to condone, dismissing the appeal on limitation. The assessee explained that she was residing abroad, there were time-zone differences and dependence on the e-filing portal under the faceless regime, resulting in the delay.
The ITAT noted that the quantum appeal arising from the very same additions had earlier been restored to the CIT(A) after the Tribunal condoned the delay therein. It found the reasons for the 52-day delay in the penalty appeal to be genuine. Accordingly, the Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the penalty appeal to the CIT(A), directing that both the quantum and Section 270A penalty appeals be decided simultaneously.
The assessee’s appeal was accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
