Cloos India Welding Technology vs ITO Ward 6(2): Penalty Appeal for AY 2015-16

Cloos India Welding Technology vs ITO Ward 6(2): Penalty Appeal for AY 2015-16

Case Number: ITA 5732/DEL/2019

Appellant: Cloos India Welding Technology Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Respondent: ITO Ward 6(2), New Delhi

Assessment Year: 2015-16

Case Filed On: 2019-07-01

Order Type: Final Tribunal Order

Date of Order: 2021-12-13

Pronounced On: 2021-12-13

Background

The case involves Cloos India Welding Technology Pvt. Ltd. as the appellant and the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 6(2), New Delhi, as the respondent. The dispute pertains to the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2015-16. The appeal was filed on 2019-07-01, and the final tribunal order was pronounced on 2021-12-13.

Reason for Filing the Case

Cloos India Welding Technology Pvt. Ltd. filed the case challenging the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was levied for alleged concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income for the assessment year 2015-16.

Tribunal Proceedings

On 13th December 2021, the tribunal, comprising Shri C. N. Prasad, Judicial Member, heard the case through video conference. The appellant was represented by Shri Ravi Bhatia, CA, while the respondent was represented by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR.

Arguments Presented

The appellant’s counsel, Shri Ravi Bhatia, CA, argued that the appeal was disposed of ex-parte by the Ld. CIT(A) without affording the appellant an adequate opportunity of being heard. The counsel submitted that the appellant had been given only one opportunity of hearing on 26/4/2019, during which the appellant sought time. The Ld. CIT(A) granted time until 30/4/2019. However, the appeal was disposed of on 30/4/2019 based on the written submissions filed, without granting the appellant a proper hearing.

The respondent’s representative, Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR, did not raise any objection to the appellant’s request for remanding the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

Tribunal’s Decision

The tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties and reviewed the case records. The key points from the tribunal’s order are as follows:

Ex-Parte Disposal

The tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(A) had disposed of the appeal ex-parte without providing the appellant an adequate opportunity of being heard. The tribunal noted that the appellant was given only one opportunity of hearing, and the appeal was disposed of on the same day the time was granted.

Restoration of Appeal

The tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh hearing. The Ld. CIT(A) was directed to dispose of the appeal de novo, in accordance with the law, after providing the appellant with an adequate opportunity of being heard.

Conclusion

The tribunal upheld the appellant’s contention and restored the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh hearing. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, concluding the proceedings.

Order pronounced on: 13/12/2021

Signatories:

C. N. PRASAD, Judicial Member

Dated: 13/12/2021

Copy forwarded to:

• Appellant
• Respondent
• CIT
• CIT(A)
• DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT NEW DELHI

Cloos India Welding Technology vs ITO Ward 6(2): Penalty Appeal for AY 2015-16