This article examines the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s ruling in the case of Rajendra Shankar Singhal vs. ITO, Ward-28(1), New Delhi, focusing on penalties for non-compliance with audit requirements for the assessment year 2014-15.
Rajendra Shankar Singhal, a resident of New Delhi, faced penalties under section 271B of the Income Tax Act due to non-compliance with audit requirements under section 44AB. The case was initially resolved ex-parte by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), leading to an appeal at the ITAT.
The appellant contested the penalties imposed due to the lack of adequate representation during the initial hearings. The primary contention was the ex-parte decision without sufficient opportunity to present his case.
Both parties presented their arguments with the Departmental Representative suggesting a de-novo adjudication. The Tribunal agreed, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and remanded the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration.
The Tribunal’s decision to remand the case underscores the importance of procedural fairness in tax adjudications. This ruling could influence how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly concerning the opportunity for adequate representation.
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform