DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 19(3), MUMBAI vs. RAJENDRA RAMESHCHANDRA CHATURVEDI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 927/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 June 2023AY 2013-143 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that once the additions forming the basis of the penalty were deleted, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not sustain. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) by the CIT(A). The penalty was levied on additions made under sections 68 and 69C, which were subsequently deleted by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the additions leading to the penalty have been deleted by the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 68,Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D‘ BENCH

For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya
For Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra
Hearing: 08/06/2023Pronounced: 28/06/2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 06/02/2023 passed by NFAC, Delhi in relation to the penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1) (C) for the A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Revenue is aggrieved by the deletion of penalty of Rs.13,46,06,137/-. The grounds raised by the Revenue are as under:-

1.

Shri Rajendra Rameshchandra Chaturvedi “1. Whether Ld CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer ws 271(1)(c) of the Act stating that the appeal against the assessment order before the ITAT is quashed 2 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act instead of observing the fact that the department had challenged the Hon'ble ITAT Order before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.”

3.

From the perusal of the grounds and from the order of the Ld. CIT (A) it is clear that, the penalty which has been levied by the AO on addition of Rs. 41,48,39,241/- made u/s.68; and addition of Rs. 2,07,41,962/- u/s.69C, the Tribunal has deleted both the additions vide order dated 23/12/2020 in & 7581/Mum/2019. Once the quantum has been deleted, then penalty u/s 271(1)(c) has no legs to stand. Otherwise also, this matter is pending before the Hon’ble High Court in the quantum proceedings, but at this stage, no penalty is leviable. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on 28th June, 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 →