M/S. SUPARSHAV SYNTHETICS PVT. LTD.,BHILWARA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 342/JODH/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 October 2023AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum addition was deleted, the penalty levied in relation to that addition was also liable to be deleted. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order confirming a penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The quantum addition that formed the basis for the penalty had previously been deleted by a co-ordinate bench of the ITAT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) could be sustained when the underlying addition had been deleted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH ‘SMC’: JODHPUR

For Respondent: Mr. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Hearing: 22/09/2023Pronounced: 27/10/2023

ORDER

PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, AM:

1.

This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against order dated 02/07/2019 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ajmer {CIT(A)} for Assessment Year 2014-15.

M/s Suparshav Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. Confirming the penalty u/sec. 271(1)(c) of Rs.3,38,000.00 is bad in law. 2. Any other matter with prior permission of the Chair.”

3. On record, we find that the quantum addition has been deleted vide the order of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Jodhpur, in dated 31/08/2020 and, hence, the penalty levied in this case is liable to be deleted.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 27th October, 2023.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →