SITA RAM MEENA INCOME TAX OFFICER - 9(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. VIVEK OMPRAKASH ABROL, MUMBAI

ITA 4618/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 September 2026AY 2016-177 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is not attracted when the addition is based solely on deeming provisions and the assessment order forming the basis of the penalty was subsequently rectified. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s deletion of the penalty.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition to the assessee's income under Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) for the difference between the purchase consideration of agricultural land and its market value. This addition was later rectified based on a DVO's report, significantly reducing the amount. The AO then levied a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) based on the original assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be levied on an addition made under a deeming provision which was subsequently rectified, and if the AO has established concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii),Section 154,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR

PER SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by revenue against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax- (Appeals), NFAC Delhi, dated 20.02.2026 for Assessment Year 2016-17 in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

ITA 4618/MUM/2026 VIVEK OMPRAKASH ABROL

2.

Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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 →