9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 605X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see submitted that as the quantum appeal of the assessee (ITA No. 148/RPR/2025) based on which the impugned penalty has been imposed, was restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC by the Tribunal vide order dated 17.04.2025, therefore, the appeal on penalty also be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld. Counsel in support of his aforesaid contention has filed the copy of the order of the quantum appeal passed by the Tribunal dated 17.04.2025. 3. The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative has fairly conceded to the contentions advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 4. I have heard the parties herein and perused the material available on record as well as considered the order of the quantum appeal dated 17.04 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as has been disclosed in the sworn in affidavit filed by the assessee before the bench that the assessee has never ever made any transaction through any broker of SEBI. Rather, the assessee is only having agricultural income. These facts were also accepted by the Ld. Sr. DR. The Ld. Sr. DR could not provide any evidence refuting these facts or could not show that the assessee did transact in shares. 8. In my considered view, in the interest of justice, the factual matrix needs to be revisited through proper verification at the level of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC to understand what exactly is the source of income of the assessee. That as has been claimed in the affidavit that the assesse is only having income from agriculture proceeds, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Mohatram Farooqui vs. CIT (SC) 2010-TIOL-23-SC-IT wherein it has been held that if addition is restored to the A.O, then penalty should also be restored. Also, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Sanjay Gupta Vs. CIT (2014) 366 ITR 18 (Del) has also held that where the quantum has been remanded to the A.O, the question of penalty on account of the said amount being treated as undisclosed income, should also be remanded to the A.O. In the present case the concerned authority shall be Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC since the quantum has been remanded back to its file for denovo adjudication. 6. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
