SHRI JITENDRA AMBALAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3, MEHSANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 536/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 September 2019AY 2012-132 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 since the quantum additions/disallowances that formed the basis for the penalty were reversed by a co-ordinate bench in quantum proceedings, the penalty itself was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged a penalty of Rs. 2,50,000 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was based on quantum additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying additions/disallowances have been deleted in quantum appeal proceedings.

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, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sandesara, A.R, Shri Virender Singh, Sr.D.R
Hearing: 08/08/2019

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Gandhinagar (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 19.12.2017 arising in the penalty order dated 28.03.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; (the Act) concerning assessment year 2012-13.

[Shri Jitendra A. Patel vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 - 2. The assessee by way of its grounds of appeal has challenged the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the penalty of Rs.2,50,000/- under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act.

3. When the matter was called for hearing, the learned AR for the assessee submitted that the quantum additions/disallowances giving rise to the imposition of penalty in appeal has been reversed by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in order dated 04.03.2019 in the quantum proceedings.

4. In view of the fact that the quantum additions/disallowances itself do not survive and ceased to exist having regard to the appellate order of the ITAT in quantum proceedings, the very basis for imposition of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) does not survive any more. Therefore, the action of the AO towards imposing penalty is set aside and cancelled.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 11/09/2019

Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 11/09/2019 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।

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 →