SHRI FIRDOSH NOSHIR ANKLESARIA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 20(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1867/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2026AY 2009-105 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was assessed at a higher amount due to the disallowance of compensation expenditure. The Assessing Officer treated the transaction as non-genuine and initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to delay without adjudicating on merits.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, subject to a cost payment. It held that since the quantum addition forming the basis of the penalty was deleted by a coordinate bench, the penalty itself could not survive.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying addition has been deleted by a higher appellate authority. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 275(1A),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI JAGADISH

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Khinchi
For Respondent: Shri Rajni Rani Roy, CIT-DR
Hearing: 07.05.2026Pronounced: 15.05.2026

Per: SHRI JAGADISH, A.M.:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 02.02.2026 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for A.Y. 2009-10 arising from penalty order passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”).

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 declaring total income of Rs.9,49,510/-. Assessment Shri Firdosh Noshir Anklesaria

was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act determining total income at Rs.18,09,510/- after disallowing compensati

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 24,918 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →