ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. J.V.S. FOODS P. LTD., JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the additions made by the Assessing Officer were deleted by the Tribunal and confirmed by the High Court, the penalty levied on those additions has no basis. Therefore, the penalty order was rightly deleted by the CIT(A).
What were the facts?
The revenue filed an appeal against the deletion of penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2010-11. The penalty was levied on additions made by disallowing exemption claimed under Section 10(38).
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the additions on which it was levied have been deleted by higher authorities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.104/JP/2019
ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of ld.CIT(A)-1, Jaipur dated 01/11/2018 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).
Rival contentions have been heard and record perused.
At the outset the ld.AR placed on record the order of Tribunal, in assessee’s own case dated 16-07-2018, wherein additions so made have been deleted. The ld.AR also placed on record the order of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court dated 14-03-2019 confirming the above order of Tribunal. additions have been deleted penalty so levied has no legs to stand.
We have considered the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found from the record that in this case penalty has been imposed with respect to additions made by disallowing the exemption claimed u/s. 10(38) of the Act. Against the addition(s) the assessee approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its order dated 16-07-2018 deleted the additions by observing at paras 4 to 5 at pages 7 to 16 of the said order. We found that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court vide its order dated 14-03-2019 has confirmed the said order of the Tribunal. The ld. DR has also fairly conceded that quantum addition has been deleted by the Tribunal. Since quantum addition(s) have been deleted, the imposition of penalty has no legs to stand. Accordingly, we confirm the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) deleting the imposition of penalty of Rs.90,00,000/- levied u/s. 271(1)( c) of the Act. Accordingly, we confirm the order of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, Grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed.
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 →- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026