ITO, Bichitra Hall Netaji Commercial Market, Rathbari – 732101, Malda vs. Dipali Singha Roy, 1, Alpur Trimohini South, Dinajpur – 733126, Balurghat

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

This appeal arises from an order under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 30.04.2025, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The penalty under Section 270A of the Act was levied by the AO vide his order dated 12.06.2023 in an exparte manner. The assessee did not comply with any notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed a penalty of Rs. 4,66,462/- and deleted a penalty of Rs. 73,47,400/-. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue approached the ITAT. The assessee claimed that they were made aware of the assessment order at a later stage and filed an appeal in the quantum matter before the Ld. CIT(A).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty amount of Rs.73,47,400/-.
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in treating the prize money as turnover.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Revenue.

Similar Judgements

• Raajendran Indira Raajendran Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 2(3), Chennai

• NEETU GUPTA Vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2011-12Allowed

• Mahadev Stone Works vs. ITO Ward-3(3)

  Varanasi bench

• Mr. Akil Abbas Rassai Vs. DCIT Circle-22(1)

  Mumbai benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• ITA No. 4349/DEL/2025; Assessment Year: 2020-21

• Income Tax Officer vs. M/s. Amaya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.