ACIT, CIRCLE 19(1), DELHI vs. BASTI SUGAR MILLS CO. LTD. NOW KNOWN AS PHENIL SUGAR LIMITED, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6054/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 20262 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the penalty appeal to the CIT(A)'s file. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the penalty appeal along with or after deciding the pending quantum appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c). Both parties agreed that the quantum appeal for the same assessment year was still pending before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be decided independently or along with the pending quantum appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

For Appellant: CA & Sh. N. K
Hearing: 05/05/2026Pronounced: 08/05/2026

1 ITA No. 6054/Del/2025 ACIT Vs Basti Sugar Mills IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6054/DEL/2025 (A.Y. 2003-04) ACIT Vs Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. Circle 19(1) Now known as Phenil Sugar Room No. 221, 2nd floor, C. r. Limited Building, Delhi Essel House 10 Asai Ali Road, Delhi PAN: AADCP0153H Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. K. V. S. R. Krishnan, CA & Sh. N. K. Garg, Adv Revenue by Sh. Shankar Lal Verma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05/05/2026 Date of Pronouncement 08/05/2026 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre

(‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 21/07/2025 for the

Assessment Year 2003-04, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the order

of penalty passed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

(‘Act’ for short).

2.

Both the parties submitted that the First Appeal challenging the

quantum for the year under consideration is still pending adjudication by

the Ld. CIT(A), which is yet to be decided by the Ld. CIT(A). Recording

the submission of both the parties, we set aside the order of the Ld.

2 ITA No. 6054/Del/2025 ACIT Vs Basti Sugar Mills

CIT(A) and restore the First Appeal challenging the order of penalty to the

file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same alongwith or

after deciding the quantum appeal pending before the Ld. CIT(A).

3.

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical

purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08th May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 08 .05.2026 Reshma Naheed, Sr.P.S Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

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 →