CHANDER YADAV,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD-2(1), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6433/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 November 2021AY 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 noted that the quantum appeal for the same assessment year had been set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. Consequently, the penalty does not survive and is directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The penalty was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying assessment order has been set aside for fresh adjudication.

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 BENCH, ‘SMC-1’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA

For Appellant: Ms. Sakshi Rajput, CA, Ms. Soumya Arora, CA
Hearing: 17.11.2021Pronounced: 17.11.2021

ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31.12.2018 of the learned CIT(A)-I, Noida, relating to Assessment Year 2011-12.

2.

Levy of penalty of Rs.4,97,500/- by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) and upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) is the only issue raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the time of hearing, filed a copy of the order of the Tribunal vide order dated 31.07.2019 for AY 2-11-12 and submitted that the quantum appal filed by the assessee has been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. Therefore, the penalty does not survive and accordingly the same should be deleted.

4.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, fairly conceded that the Tribunal has set-aside the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer in the quantum appeal.

5.

I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides. Since, the quantum appeal has already been set-aside by the Tribunal to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, therefore, the present penalty does not survive and accordingly the same is directed to be deleted. However, the Assessing Officer is at liberty to initiate fresh penalty proceedings after completion of the assessment in the set-aside proceedings as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The ground raised by the assessee is accordingly allowed.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

The Order was pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on 17.11.2021.

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 →