SANDEEP TANEJA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-45(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8893/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 June 2022AY 2013-143 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 had previously allowed the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 54 in quantum proceedings. Since the original disallowance was deleted, the penalty levied on that basis cannot survive.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2013-14. The penalty was based on a disallowance of exemption claimed under Section 54 of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying disallowance in the assessment order has been deleted by the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 54

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “G” : DELHI ]

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASADSHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Appellant: Shri Ummed Kuntal, Advocate;
For Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.;
Hearing: 21/06/2022

आदेश / O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J. M. :

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15 {hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals)] New Delhi, dated 26.09.2019 in sustaining the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for assessment year 2013-14.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the Tribunal in dated 11.10.2018 allowed the claim for exemption under Section 54 of the Act in respect of second residential property following the judgement of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Laxman Singh Rawat. Therefore, the ld. Counsel submits that since the Tribunal deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in respect of deduction claimed under Section 54 of the Act by the assessee. The penalty levied pursuant to the disallowance made under Section 54 of the Act by the Assessing Officer will not survive.

3. The ld. DR fairly submits that the Tribunal deleted the disallowance made under Section 54 of the Act by the Assessing Officer in quantum proceedings.

4.

Heard rival submissions perused the orders of the authorities below and the decision of the Tribunal in the quantum proceedings in dated 11.10.2018. It is observed from the order of the Tribunal that the claim for exemption under Section 54 of the Act which was denied by the Assessing Officer was deleted by the Tribunal following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Laxman Singh Rawat (supra). Since the disallowance made in assessment proceedings is deleted by the Tribunal the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act on the basis of the disallowance made in the assessment order will not survive. Hence, the penalty order dated 23.03.2018 passed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration is set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the penalty. 2

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on : 21/06/2022.

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 →