JITINDER SINGH CHADHA,NEW DELHI vs. PR.CIT- 18, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7221/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 December 2021AY 2013-142 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 in the quantum proceedings was deleted, the penalty levied on that addition also had no basis and should be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2013-14. The penalty was based on an addition made in the quantum proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can sustain if the underlying addition in quantum proceedings is deleted.

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, DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Ravinder Singh Ahuja, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 07.12.2021Pronounced: 07.12.2021

ORDER

PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM:

1.

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against impugned order dated 28.09.2018, passed by Ld. Pr. CIT-18, New Delhi in relation to the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for the Assessment Year 2013-14 levied a penalty of Rs.20,68,900/-.

2.

Before us, Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the quantum proceedings, Tribunal vide has deleted the addition on which the impugned penalty has been levied. He therefore submitted that the penalty should be deleted. Learned DR on the other hand admitted that the quantum proceedings matter stands decided in assessee’s favour.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In the present case since in the quantum proceedings, addition stands deleted, therefore, penalty levied on the same additions do not have legs to stand and same is directed to be deleted. Thus the ground of assessee is allowed.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07.12.2021

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 →