KAMINI KRISHNA KOTAK ,MUMBAI vs. ADDITIONAL / JOINT / DEPUTY / ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

ITA 6610/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2025AY 2011-2012Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty could not be sustained as the issue of notional rental income had been decided in favour of the assessee in a previous assessment year. The Tribunal also noted discrepancies in the grounds for penalty initiation and levy.

What were the facts?

The assessee was levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for not disclosing notional rental income. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty, and the assessee appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is leviable when the underlying addition has been decided in favour of the assessee by a higher tribunal, and discrepancies in penalty initiation and levy.

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, E BENCH, MUMBAI

Per Bench:

1.

These are three appeals preferred by the Assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 arising from three separates orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’], under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], whereby the appeal preferred by the Assessee challenging penalty

ITA No.6602, 6610 & 6640/Mum/2024 Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 levied by the

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 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →