ADITYA VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the additions forming the basis of the penalties were deleted, the penalties could not survive. Therefore, the penalties imposed were deleted.
What were the facts?
The assessees' appeals were against penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The additions that formed the basis for these penalties had already been deleted by the Tribunal in separate quantum appeals.
What were the issues?
Whether penalties under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying additions have been deleted by the Tribunal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN CIRCUIT BENCH, DEHRADUN
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE- & SHRI M. BALAGANESH
Date of hearing : 23.06.2023 Date of pronouncement: 23.06.2023 ORDER
Captioned appeals by the assesees are against three separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-IV, Kanpur pertaining to assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10.
At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the additions, based on which, the penalties have been levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of all these assessees, in the meanwhile, have been fully deleted by the Tribunal. Thus, he submitted, penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot survive.
Learned Departmental Representative fairly agreed with the aforesaid submissions of the assessee.
Having considered rival submissions, we find that while deciding the quantum appeals in case of the respective assessees, the Tribunal, in three separate orders passed on 31.01.2023 in ITA No. 3400/Del/2015 and ITA No. 339/Del/2015 has fully deleted the additions based on which, penalties under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were imposed. That being the admitted position emerging on record, the penalties imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of the aforesaid assessees cannot survive. Accordingly, penalties imposed in all these appeals are deleted.
In the result, appeals are allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23/06/2023.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sri Mohanraj vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S Greenlam Industries LTD And Another vs. The UOI And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026