RAGHUVEER SINGH KHANGAROT,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 213/JPR/2015Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 July 2019AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the penalty to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh decision. This was done because the quantum appeal concerning the same addition had also been restored to the AO.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2010-11. The penalty was related to an addition on account of unexplained deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty proceedings should be decided afresh when the quantum addition is restored to the AO. The validity of the penalty in light of the pending quantum appeal.

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, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMAvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 213/JP/2015

For Appellant: Shri K.L. Moolchandani (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 25/07/2019Pronounced: 25/07/2019

ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 22/12/2014 for the A.Y. 2010-11 in the matter of imposition of penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

At the outset, then ld AR of the assessee has placed on record the order passed by the Tribunal in quantum appeal dated 25/03/2019 wherein addition on account of unexplained deposit of Rs. 39,59,443/- was restored by the Tribunal to the file of A.O..

1.

2 ITA 213/JP/2015 Raghuveer Singh Khangarot Vs. DCIT 3. We had carefully gone through the order of the Tribunal dated 25/03/2019 wherein the matter was restored back to the A.O. for deciding afresh. The matter is still pending before the A.O., therefore, in all fairness, the penalty imposed with respect to the very same addition is also restored back to the A.O. for deciding afresh in terms of the quantum order passed by the Tribunal dated 25/3/2019.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25th July, 2019

Sd/- ¼jes'k lh 'kekZ½ (RAMESH C SHARMA) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 25th July, 2019 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Raghuveer Singh Khangarot, Jaipur. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The D.C.I.T., Circle-7, Jaipur. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 213/JP/2015) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

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 →