HIMALAYA REALTECH PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 11(2), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6725/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 June 2022AY 2012-132 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the quantum dispute and the penalty imposed does not survive. The assessee requested the appeal to be treated as withdrawn, which the Revenue did not dispute.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2012-13. The assessee had settled the quantum dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) survives after the quantum dispute has been settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

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 DLEHI

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY

For Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 29/06/2022

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 10.06.2019, impugned herein, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-4, New Delhi (in short “Ld. Commissioner”), whereby penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the assessment year 2012-13 was affirmed.

2.

None is present on behalf of the Assessee. However, vide application dated 10.06.2022 available on record, the Assesseeclaimed thatas the Assesseeunder Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, has already settled the quantum dispute for the year under [2] consideration and the Revenue Department has issued form No. 5 dated 23.03.2021, the penalty imposed does not survive and therefore the present appeal may be treated as withdrawn. Ld. DR did not refute the claim of the Assessee.

3.

Considering the factual position stated above, the present appeal arising out of the penalty order, deserves to be dismissed as withdrawn.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29/06/2022

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 →