SURESH TRILOTKAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER 42(3)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4487/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL ( (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the quantum appeal under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, no penalty can be levied, and the present appeal becomes infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a penalty appeal against an order of the CIT(A)/NFAC for AY 2017-18. The assessee had also opted for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2024' for the quantum appeal for the same assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty can be levied when the quantum appeal has been settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 91,Section 92,Section 93

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Shri Poojan Mehta
For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT D.R
Hearing: 07.07.2025Pronounced: 16.07.2025

Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The present penalty appeal filed by the assessee arises out of order dated 20/08/2024 passed by the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC, for assessment year 2017-18 on following grounds of appeal :

“1. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)) erred in framing an ex parte order.

2 ITA 4487/Mum/2024; A.Y. 2017-18 Suresh Trilotkar 2. The NFAC erred ini not adjudicating the following ground of appeal - "The National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer) erred in levying penalty of Rs 9,197 under section 270A of the Act. The appellant contends that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer ought not to have levied the impugned penalty under section 2704 of the Act inasmuch as the Assessing Officer has not appreciated the facts of the case in its entirety. The appellant craves leave to add to, alter or amend the aforestated ground of appeal”

2. At the outset the Ld.AR has submitted that the assessee preferred ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2024’ in respect of quantum appeal for assessment year 2017-18 and Form 4 has been issued in respect of the same. Scanned and reproduced here under is the Form 4 issued by the department :-

3 ITA 4487/Mum/2024; A.Y. 2017-18 Suresh Trilotkar 2.1 The Ld.AR thus prayed that in view of the above the penalty levied is to be deleted. 2.2 The Ld.DR agreed with the submissions of the Ld.AR.

We have perused the submissions advance by both sides in the light of record placed before us.

3.

As the assessee has settled the quantum appeal in VSV scheme no penalty can be levied. Accordingly the present appeal becomes infructuous. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced in the open court on 16/07/2025

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →