POONAM SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 5, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6586/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 November 2022AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the quantum addition, which formed the basis for the penalty, had been deleted by a previous order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the penalty levied by the revenue could not be sustained.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty order. The penalty was levied based on additions made to the total income during the assessment. The assessee argued that the additions were wrong and that penalty proceedings are not automatic.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying addition to income has 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, DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI

Before: Dr. B. R. R. KumarSh. Yogesh Kumar US

Hearing: 28.11.2022Pronounced: 30.11.2022

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-5, New Delhi dated 20.06.2019.

2.

Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:

“1. The impugned order of penalty has been passed in haste during the pendency of quantum appeal in an arbitrarily without making a justified case of any concealment of particulars or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and thus was unfounded, illegal, unjustified opposed to the principles of natural justice and thus is liable to be quashed.

2. A mere disallowances or addition to total income is not enough to justify the levy of penalty in as much as the penalty proceedings are not automatic. Learned assessing Officer has erred to make out a fit case for levy of penalty in view of the facts, circumstances and nature of additions which were duly explained during the course of assessment as well as penalty proceedings and the explanation of the assessee has not been completely considered, appraised nor the same were proved to be false.

3.

On facts and circumstances of the case, the additions made in the assessment were wrong in as much as that agricultural income has been regularly declared and accepted on several occasions in the past including ay 2013-14 and does not justify the levy of penalty to make out a case of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.”

3. It has been brought to our notice that the quantum addition stands deleted by the order of the Tribunal in dated 23.11.2021 and hence the penalty levied by the revenue do not sustain as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 30/11/2022.

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 →