DCIT CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI vs. JDC TRADERS LTD, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1509/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 November 2022AY 2007-084 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 upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty. Since the penalty was levied on quantum additions that were themselves deleted by the ITAT, the penalty no longer survived.

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was initially assessed, then reopened, and subsequently reassessed with additions. A penalty was imposed under Section 271(1)(c) based on these additions. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty because the ITAT had already deleted the quantum additions.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying quantum additions have been deleted by a higher appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 154,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “C” : DELHI

Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 03.11.2022Pronounced: 18.11.2022

ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, A.M. : This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-5, New Delhi, dated 31.01.2020 in Appeal No. Del/CIT(A)-5/0011/2017-18 relating to the A.Y. 2007-08.

2 ITA.No.1509/Del./2020 M/s. JDC Traders Ltd., New Delhi.

2.

Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a company who had filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2007-08 on 30.10.2007 declaring total income of Rs.65,33,380/-. Assessment was initially framed under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide order dated 30.10.2009 and the total income was determined at Rs.65,33,380/-. Thereafter, the case was reopened under section 147 by issuing notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Consequently, assessment was framed under section 147 /143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide order dated 14.11.2012 and the total income was determined at Rs.70,11,410/-. Thereafter, an order was passed under section 154 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 03.01.2014 and consequently, total income was determined at Rs.1,04,65,381/-. On the additions made in the re- assessment order, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act at Rs.14,09,219/- was imposed by A.O. vide order dated 28.03.2017.

2.1. Aggrieved by the penalty order of A.O. assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide

3 ITA.No.1509/Del./2020 M/s. JDC Traders Ltd., New Delhi. order dated 31.01.2020 in Appeal No.Del/CIT(A)- 5/0011/2017-18 for the impugned A.Y. 2007-08, deleted the penalty by noting the fact that the ITAT vide order dated 11.10.2019 had deleted the quantum additions.

3.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before us.

4.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite service of notice. We, therefore, proceed to decide the appeal on merits, ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing the Learned DR.

5.

The Ld. D.R. supported the order of the A.O.

6.

We have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty made on quantum additions by noting that the ITAT vide order dated 11.10.2019 had deleted the quantum additions and, therefore, the penalty levied on such quantum additions, does not survive on account of decision of Tribunal. Before us, the Revenue had not placed anything on record to demonstrate that the quantum order

4 ITA.No.1509/Del./2020 M/s. JDC Traders Ltd., New Delhi. granting relief to the assessee by the Tribunal has been set aside, stayed or overruled by any higher judicial Forum. In such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A) and we therefore confirm the same. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

7.

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 18.11.2022.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →