SHREE NATH JI AGRO PRODUCTS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-23(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3067/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 April 2022AY 2014-152 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 once the substantive addition is settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, the penalty order related to it ceases to subsist. Therefore, the appeal against the penalty is allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The substantive addition, which led to the penalty, was settled under the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020'.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal against a penalty order survives when the substantive addition leading to the penalty 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

Before: SH. R.K.PANDA & SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 28.04.2022Pronounced: 28.04.2022

The appeal has been preferred against order dated 11.03.2019 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, New Delhi for assessment year 2014- 15 against order dated 30.05.2017 of DCIT, Circle -23(1), New Delhi whereby penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act of Rs. 92,700/- was imposed.

2.

Heard and perused the record. It was mentioned on behalf of the assessee that in regard to the substantive addition vide the assessee has come in appeal and as it was settled under ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’.

3.

The clarification dated 22.04.2020 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes in regard to Direct Taxes, Vivad Se Viswas Act, 2020 in question no. 8 and 34 and in clarification dated 04.12.2020 in question no 57, the issue of effect of settlement of substantive appeal, on appeal against penalty have been considered and the same indicate that once the matter is settled between the assessee and the revenue under the Scheme of said Act, then nothing subsists in the penalty order. Ld. DR could not controvert the aforesaid.

4.

Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the impugned penalty order is set aside.

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 →