RATNASHRI BUILDTECH PVT LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CICRLE 4, NEW DELHI
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 quantum additions were deleted, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) was no longer sustainable. Therefore, the penalty orders were liable to be quashed.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for various assessment years. The quantum additions that formed the basis for these penalties had been deleted by a co-ordinate bench.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying additions have been deleted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Saktijit DeyDr. B. R. R. Kumar
Heard together (5 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:
The present appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi dated 07.06.2019. to 5722/Del/2019 2 Ratnashri Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Ratna Talwar 2. Since, the issues involved in all these appeals are identical, they were heard together and being adjudicated by a common order.
As per its grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of varied amounts in other captioned appeals for different Assessment Years.
4. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. Counsel referred to the decision rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench in bunch of group cases including the captioned assessee passed in quantum proceedings vide order dated 19.01.2021 wherein the quantum addition has been deleted.
The ld. DR for the Revenue did not rebut any of the observations made on behalf of the assessee.
On consideration of rival submissions and perusal of the case records, we notice that the quantum appeals in relation to the captioned appeals have been adjudicated in favour of the assessee. Hence, the order of penalty levied is liable to be quashed.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 04/07/2022.
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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
