FORK MEDIA GROUP PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4420/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 September 2026AY 2021-20224 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 revised assessment order did not contain any additions, the very basis for levying the penalty under Section 270A of the Act ceased to exist. Therefore, the penalty order was liable to be set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against a penalty order was dismissed by the CIT(A) under the mistaken impression that the assessee had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The original assessment order, which formed the basis for the penalty, was later set aside by the PCIT, and a revised assessment order was passed without any additions.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 270A can survive when the underlying assessment order, which formed its basis, is set aside and a revised assessment results in no additions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Pronounced: 11/09/2026

PER SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, dated 20.02.2026 for the assessment year 2021-22 which arises out of the penalty order passed u/s. 270A of the Act.

2.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on mistaken impression that the assessee had opted under Direct Taxes Vivad se Viswas Scheme (DTVSVS). Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has neither opted under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, nor was made any such submission before the learned CIT(A), and therefore there is no justification for dismissing the appeal by the learned CIT(A).

3.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that, in fact, the quantum additions made in the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act which is the basis for levy of penalty u/s. 270A of the Act, was set aside by the Ld. PCIT u/s. 263 of the Act, vide order dated 27.05.2024, directing the Assessing Officer to make a thorough inquiry and reassess the income as per the provisions of the Act after giving opportunity to the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed a copy of the order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act dated 30.03.2026 by the Assessing Officer pursuant to the directions of the Ld. PCIT and submitted that while completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer did not make any addition and, therefore, the very basis for levy of penalty u/s. 270A of the Act did not survive. Therefore, the penalty order be quashed.

4.

Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Global Hospitality Licensing SARL vs Asst./DCIT in Writ Petition No. 1611 of 2024, dated 22.06.2026, and referring to paragraph 32 of the said judgment, submitted that the basis for levying the penalty is unsustainable.

5.

Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below and the decisions relied upon. We observed that the Ld. PCIT, vide order dated 25.07.2025, set aside the order passed u/s. 143(3), r.w.s. 144B of the Act, for the assessment year 2021-22 and, consequently, the assessment order pursuant to 263 order was passed on 30.03.2026, wherein no addition has been made. Thus, the very basis for levy of penalty u/s. 270A of the Act no longer survives. Hence, the penalty order is liable to be set aside. Thus, allowing the appeal of the assessee, we set aside the penalty order passed u/s. 270A of the Act.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 11/09/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- PRABHASH SHANKAR CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 11/09/2026 Prabhat Copy to: FORK MEDIA GROUP PRIVATE LIMITED, LG 10,11,12 ART GUILD HOUSE, WING-A, 1 PHOENIX MARKETCITY, KURLA WEST, MUMBAI-400070, MAHARASHTRA

ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), AAYKAR BHAVAN, MAHARSHI KARVE 2 ROAD, MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400020, MAHARASHTRA

3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →