What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no error in the CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty. Since the quantum assessment was pending, the penalty order was also set aside.

The revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which had deleted the penalty imposed on the assessee. The CIT(A) had deleted the penalty because the quantum assessment was sent back for readjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty can be sustained when the quantum assessment is set aside for readjudication.

ITO vs Jharkhand State Sheduled Caste Co… | ITAT Ranchi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Sharma, A.R

For Respondent: Shri H. Robindro Singh, CIT-DR, Shri J.P. Sharma, A.R

Hearing: 31/07/2026Pronounced: 31/07/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 183/Ran/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.O., Jharkhand State Scheduled Caste Ranchi, Cooperative Development Corporation Vs. Ltd., 232 Kusai Colony, Doranda, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) PAN No. AAAJJ 0671 N Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Revenue

Department represented by Shri H. Robindro Singh, CIT-DR Assessee represented by Shri J.P. Sharma, A.R. Date of hearing 31/07/2026 Date of pronouncement 31/07/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is the appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2014-15/10392305 dated 19/01/2026 for the A.Y. 2015-16. 2. Shri H. Robindro Singh, ld. CIT-DR is represented on behalf of the revenue and Shri J.P. Sharma, ld. A.R. is represented on behalf of the assessee. 3. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that in last paragraph of para 7 at page 20 of the order of the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty on the ground that the quantum assessment has already been sent back to the Assessing Officer for readjudication. As the revenue has not been able to point out any error in the findings of the ld. CIT(A), therefore, we do

ITA No. 183/Ran/2026 ITO Vs Jharkhand State Scheduled Caste Co-Op Devl. Corp. Ltd. not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), consequently, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed. 4. In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on 31/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 31/07/2026 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT 4. DR By order 5. Guard File Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, MAIN ROAD, RANCHI vs. JHARKHAND STATE SHEDULED CASTE CO OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., RANCHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments