INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-1 THANE, THANE vs. M/S BLUE STAR REALTORS PVT LIMITED, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271C cannot be sustained if the interest under Section 201(1A) has been deleted, especially when the payee has no resultant tax liability. The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the deletion of penalty under Section 271C by the CIT(A). The penalty was levied for failure to deduct tax at source, but the underlying interest under Section 201(1A) had already been deleted by the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271C is leviable when the related interest under Section 201(1A) has been deleted and the payee has no tax liability.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Eli Lily & Co.221 citing312 ITR 225 · 2009 · SC
- Ramkrishna Vedanta Math v. ITO26 citing55 SOT 417 · 2012 · ITAT
- CIT TDS v. Bharat Hotels Ltd.10 citing64 Taxmann.com 325 · 2015 · HC
- RBL Bank Limited v. ITO (TDS)6 citing65 Taxmann.com 219 · 2016 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These two appeals by the Revenue are directed against the two separate orders dated 15.12.2021 and 21.12.2021 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2014-15 and 2013-14 respectively.
M/s Blue Star Realtors Pvt. Ltd. M/s Blue Star As common/connected issue-in-dispute are involved in these dispute are involved in these appeals, therefore same were heard together and disposed off by herefore same were heard together and disposed off by herefore same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consoli
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.
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 271C
- Sbi, (Erstwhile Sbbj), Baran vs ITO (TDS), KotaITA 143/JPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Jagadish Panchal, Udaipur vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 314/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Teampumkin Corporation, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer (TDS)-2(3)(2), MumbaiITA 5318/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed22 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Teampumkin Corporation, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer (TDS)-2(3)(2) Mumbai…ITA 5281/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed22 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Azure Green Tech Private Limited, Delhi vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 6199/DEL/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026