SUNIL KUMAR,DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 20(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6378/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 August 2021AY 2010-115 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 based was deleted, the penalty had no basis and could not survive. Therefore, the penalty was cancelled.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 42,60,708/- and levied a penalty of Rs. 12,78,534/- under Section 271(1)(c). The ITAT had previously deleted the addition of Rs. 42,60,708/- in the assessee's own case for the same assessment year.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying addition, which formed the basis for the penalty, has been deleted by a higher appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

(A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 08.11.2018 for Assessment Year 2010-11.

(B) Vide Assessment Order dated 28.03.2013 u/s. 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.42,60,708/- u/s. 40 (a) (ia) of the I. T. Act ; besides some other additions. An order dated 21.03.2017 was separately passed u/s. 271 (1) (c) of the I. T. Act levying penalty of Rs.12,78,534 (being the ITA No.-6378 /Del/2019. Sunil Kumar. minimum amount of penalty u/s. 271 (1) (c) of I. T. Act.) This penalty was levied in respect of aforesaid addition of Rs. Rs.42,60,708/- made by the Assessing Officer in the aforesaid assessment order dated 28.03.2013. This addition of Rs.42,60,708/- has been deleted by the coordinate Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in assessee’s appeal in vide order dated 17.05.2019 for A.Y.2010-11. The present appeal before us, filed by the assessee, is against levy of aforesaid penalty amounting to Rs.12,78,534/- levied vide aforesaid order dated 21.03.2017 u/s. 271 (1) (c) of I. T. Act, which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his impugned appellate order dated 08.11.2018.

(C) At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted that the aforesaid penalty amounting to Rs.12,78,534/- u/s. 271 (1) (c) of the I. T. Act has no legs to stand, in view of order of ITAT in assessee’s appeal dated 17.05.2019 in for A.Y.2010-11 wherein the aforesaid addition of Rs.42,60,708/- has already been deleted. The Ld. Departmental Representative agreed with the submission of Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee; and stated that the aforesaid penalty u/s. 271 (1) (c) amounting to Rs.12,78,534/- does not survive because the corresponding addition amounting to Rs.42,60,708/- has already been deleted by ITAT vide aforesaid order dated 17.05.2019 in assessee’s case for A.Y.2010-11 in ITA No.956/Del/2016.

ITA No.-6378 /Del/2019. Sunil Kumar.

(D) The facts are not in dispute. Both the sides are in agreement that the quantum addition of Rs.42,60,708/- in respect of which aforesaid penalty amounting to Rs.12,78,534/- has been levied by the AO has already been deleted by the ITAT in aforesaid order dated 17.05.2019. That being the case, both the sides are also in agreement that aforesaid penalty u/s. 271 (1) (c) of the I. T. Act amounting to Rs.12,78,534/- has no legs to stand and does not survive. In view of the forgoing, and as both the sides are in agreement and further in deference to the aforesaid order of coordinate bench of ITAT, Delhi in assesee’s own case for A.Y.2010-11 in dated 17.05.2019 ; we cancel the penalty levied by the AO u/s. 271 (1) (c) of the I. T. Act vide aforesaid order dated 21.03.2017. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned appellate order dated 08.11.2018 of the Ld. CIT(A); and allow assessee’s appeal. For coming to this decision, we take strength from the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K. C. Builders Vs. ACIT [2004] 135 Taxmann 461 (SC) in which Hon’ble Supreme Court held, that where the additions made in the Assessment Order, on the basis of which penalty for concealment was levied, are deleted, there remains no basis at all for levying the penalty for concealment, and, therefore, in such a case no such penalty can survive and the same is liable to be cancelled.

(E) In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

ITA No.-6378 /Del/2019. Sunil Kumar. This order has been already pronounced orally on 18.08.2021 in Open Court, in the presence of Representatives of both sides; after conclusion of the hearing. Now, this written order is signed today on 18.08.2021.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →