SH. PARVEEN KUMAR L/H SMT. DARSHAN DEVI,KAITHAL vs. ITO, W-3, KAITHAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 632/CHANDI/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 September 2021AY 2007-082 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the basis for the penalty no longer existed, the appeal had become infructuous. The Revenue did not object to this.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was barred by limitation. However, the addition that formed the basis for the penalty was not repeated in a subsequent assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal becomes infructuous if the underlying addition for penalty is no longer sustained.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आदेश/Order

PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT

1.

This is an appeal by the legal heir of the deceased assessee against the order dt. 23/07/2018 of Ld. CIT(A), Karnal.

2.

The Registry has pointed out that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 219 days.

3.

During the course of hearing the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee at the very outset stated that the addition on the basis of which the impugned penalty was levied by the A.O. and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) has not been repeated by the A.O in the order passed on 31/12/2019 on the direction of the ITAT in order dt. 28/09/2018. So there remains no addition which was the basis of levying the impugned penalty as such the appeal of the assessee now become infructuous.

4.

Ld. DR did not object if the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous.

5.

In view of the above the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

(Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/09/2021)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →