ORDINARY FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 19(2), 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 had previously deleted the addition of Rs. 49,00,000/- which formed the basis for the penalty. Therefore, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) was deleted as it had no foundation.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal challenges a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The penalty was based on an addition of Rs. 49,00,000/- made in the assessment order.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the addition forming its basis has been deleted by the Tribunal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.” NEW DELHI ]
Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, S.M.C.
आदेश /O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J.M. :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, New Delhi, [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals)] dated 13.09.2017 for the assessment year 2011-12 in sustaining the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
None appeared when the matter called for hearing on 14.03.2022. However, the ld. Counsel for the assessee furnished a brief note stating that the Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act on the sole addition of Rs.49,00,000/- made in the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 11.03.2014. It is stated that the Tribunal by its order dated 21.02.2022 deleted the addition of Rs.49,00,000/- made in the assessment order. Copy of the order was placed on record. Therefore, it is submitted that in the light of the order of the Tribunal the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) be deleted.
I have perused the order of the Tribunal and find that the Tribunal in (Del) of 2015 dated 21.02.2022 deleted the impugned addition of Rs.49,00,000/- made under Section 68 of the Act by allowing the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, since the very basis for levying penalty is deleted, the penalty has no legs to stand. Accordingly, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is deleted.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on : 28/04/2022.
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 →- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026