JAI PRAKASH BHAGAT,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO, JAMSHEDPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the penalty issue should be decided after the quantum appeal is adjudicated. Therefore, the matter was restored back to the CIT(A) to decide the penalty after considering the quantum appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee sold an immovable property for ₹10,75,000, but the stamp duty value was ₹27,40,000. The Assessing Officer reopened the case, added the difference as capital gains, and imposed a penalty under Section 270A. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to a delay.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty under Section 270A is sustainable when the quantum appeal is still pending and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on delay without deciding on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY & SMT. RAJANI GUDURI
PER: BENCH
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 29/04/2026 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee has filed return of income on 31/07/2017 declaring total income of ₹ 2,97,500/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer received information that the assessee has transacted high value of immovable property where the consideration received as a result of transfer of capital asset is less than the value adopted by the Stamp Valuation authority. The assessee ha
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.
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 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026