GANPATI INDUSTRIAL SPARES PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

ITA 59/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur11 September 2026AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty order was indeed passed beyond the prescribed limitation period. Consequently, the penalty levied was deleted, and the appeal was allowed on this legal ground.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged a penalty order levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was that the penalty order was passed beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under Section 275(1)(c) of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty order passed under Section 271(1)(c) was barred by limitation as per Section 275(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 275(1)(c),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR SMC BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agrawal, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Abhay Shende, Sr.DR
Hearing: 08/09/2026Pronounced: 11/09/2026

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi (for short, “CIT(A)”) dated 10.12.2025 passed u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is arising out of penalty order dated 17.04.2025 passed u/sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. 2. Grievance of the assessee is against the levy of penalty u/sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act at Rs. 4,62,000/- for the alleged concealment of income of Rs. 14,00,000/-. Though, assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal on merits of the case, I will first take up the legal ground raised by the assessee challenging the validity of assessment proceedings being time barred

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 →