SURESH TRILOTKAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER 42(3)(4), MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
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?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL
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.
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
- Kamleshkumar Somalal Bhatt, Himatnagar vs Income Tax Ofifcer, Ward 1, HimatnagarITA 2130/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Kkg Associates, Visakhapatnam vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)…ITA 345/VIZ/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shamsunder Pritesh Malode, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-12(1), HyderabadITA 399/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Rama Naidu Gutha, Anantapur vs ITO, Ward -1, AnantapurITA 1895/HYD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026