SANJIV GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2670/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 August 2022AY 2008-093 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the addition forming the basis of the penalty has been deleted, the penalty levied is no longer sustainable. Consequently, the penalty order is set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal challenges the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) based on an addition made for interest on a deposit in an alleged foreign bank account. The addition itself, which formed the basis for the penalty, was subsequently deleted by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying addition on which it was based 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 ‘B’ : NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Garg, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Hearing: 31.08.2022

ASSESSEE BY : Shri V.K. Garg, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 31.08.2022 Date of Order : 31.08.2022

ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.

CIT (Appeals)-30, New Delhi dated 12.03.2018 for the Assessment Year 2008-09.

2.

The issue raised is that ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on account of amount of addition on account of accrual/interest on deposit in alleged foreign bank account, HSBC Geneva. deleted by the ld. CIT (A) vide order dated 02.06.2022. Hence, he submitted that the penalty levied with reference to addition which has been deleted is liable to be deleted.

4.

Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue did not dispute the proposition that the addition of interest with reference to what penalty has been levied has already been deleted.

5.

Hence, upon careful consideration on a proposition that the addition by reference to which the penalty has been levied has already been deleted, the penalty confirming order of ld. CIT (A) is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, we set aside the order of ld. CIT (A) and direct that the penalty be deleted.

6.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 31st day of August, 2022 after the conclusion of hearing.

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 →