SUVARNA RAJAN MURANJAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 42(3)(4), MUMBAI

Learned counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the Tribunal by order dated 18.06.2026 in ITA No.9313/Mum/2025 had set aside the quantum addition to the Assessing Officer for examination of the additional evidences furnished by the assessee and to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. A copy of the order of the Tribunal is placed on record.

Heard rival contentions, perused the orders of authorities below and order passed by the Tribunal in quantum proceedings. On careful perusal of the findings of the Tribunal in quantum proceedings, we observed that the Tribunal restored the quantum addition to the file of Assessing Officer to examine the additional evidences and to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. Since the quantum addition has been restored to the file of Assessing Officer, the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act based on such quantum addition cannot survive. Thus, we set aside the penalty order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2016-17 to the file of the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer is at liberty to passed an appropriate order based on the outcome of the quantum proceedings.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above.