Aditya Kogta vs. ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee filed a return of income declaring a total income of Rs.2,53,000/-. The assessment was framed at a total income of Rs.27,03,131/- by making additions of Rs.15,00,131/- and Rs.9,50,000/- on account of difference between sale consideration & stamp value and unexplained cash credits respectively. The penalty proceedings were initiated under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by issuing a notice dated 07/12/2017. The penalty order was passed on 07/02/2020 on account of concealment of income amounting to Rs.15,00,131/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) with a delay of four days. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal on the ground that no application for condonation of delay had been filed by the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner, the assessee preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds mentioned above.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) denied natural justice by not acknowledging the reasons for delay in filing appeal?
• 2. Whether confirming the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.3,61,467/- is bad in law?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Ram Garhia Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-63(1), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• The Hisar Leading Bank Co-op Non-Agri Thrift & Credit Society vs ITO, Ward 1, Hisar

  Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• G.D. Goenka Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Central Circle-15

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19Allowed

• Moti Lal vs. Income Tax Officer

  Jodhpur bench

• Suresh Chand v. ITO Ward 4(1)

  Delhi Bench ‘G’, New Delhi benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Echo Entertainment Private Limited vs. Income Tax Officer

  Kolkata bench