ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-3(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S. OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, DELHI

ITA 5742/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 January 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH ( (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty by the CIT(A). It reasoned that the issue of residential status was debatable and had been consistently treated in a certain way in prior years, and that the assessee had filed the revised return as a non-resident under protest.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income declaring itself as a domestic company (resident). Subsequently, the Assessing Officer reopened the case, treating the assessee as a non-resident, and levied a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars.

What were the issues?

Whether the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is justified when the assessee's residential status was a debatable issue and the assessee had filed a revised return under protest.

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, MUMBAI BENCH “I” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul Charkha, Mr. Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 31/01/2025

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 28.08.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – 57, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for AY 2015-16 , in relation to penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in M/s Oxford University Press M/s Oxford University Press short ‘the Act’) levied by the Assessing Officer. The grounds raised t ‘the Act’) levied by the Assessing Officer. The grounds raised t ‘the Act’) levied by the Assessing Officer. The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under: by the Revenue are reproduced as under:

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →