ADARSH PUBLIC SCHOOL,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE- 1, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 106/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 February 2022AY 2011-123 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the addition on which the penalty was levied has already been deleted by a previous order of the Tribunal, the penalty cannot survive. Consequently, the penalty was deleted.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer determined the assessee's total income at Rs. 6,63,290/- against a returned income of Nil. The CIT(A) enhanced the income to Rs. 1,04,85,689/- and imposed a penalty under Section 271(1)(c).

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the addition forming the basis of the penalty has been deleted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Singhal, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Manu Chourasia, Sr. DR
Hearing: 03/02/2022

O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: 1. The present appeal is preferred by the Assessee/Appellant herein against the order dated 30.03.2017 impugned herein passed by CIT-(A)-1, Noida (hereinafter called in short as the “ld. Commissioner”), u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2011-12, whereby the ld. Commissioner imposed the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, to the tune of Rs. 1,04,85,689/- @ 100% of the quantum of income determined by him.

2.

In this case, assessment order dated 28.01.2014 was passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act for the Assessment Year under consideration and total income of the Assessee was determined at Rs. 6,63,290/- as against the returned income of Rs. Nil.

3.

Against the said assessmentorder, the Assessee preferred first appeal before the ld. Commissioner who vide order dated 30.03.2017 in appeal, enhanced the income of the Assessee to the tune of Rs. 1,04,85,689/- which was the gross receipt of the Assessee for the Assessment Year under consideration .

4.

The ld. Commissioner also initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of particulars of income and ultimately while passing impugned order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, imposed the penalty of Rs. 1,04,85,689/- @ 100% of the quantum of income allegedly sought to be evaded as determined by him.

5.

Aggrieved against the impugned order, the Assessee has preferred the instant appeal.

6.

Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. At the outset, it was claimed by the ld.AR and not refuted by the Ld. DR that the Hon’ble Tribunal vide its order dated 31.03.2018 has allowed the Assessee’s quantum appeal no. against the order dated 30.03.2017 passed by the ld.Commissioner u/s 250 of the Act and deleted the addition on the basis of which the penalty was imposed by the Ld. Commissioner.

Since the addition on the basis of which penalty was levied, has already been deleted, the penalty cannot survive. Consequently, the penalty is deleted.

7.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee stands allowed.

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 →