SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1391/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 December 2022AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum disallowances on which the penalty was retained by the CIT(A) were deleted by the Tribunal in the assessee's appeal, the consequential penalty would not survive.

What were the facts?

The assessee was subjected to penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for AY 2008-09. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty on disallowance of consultancy charges and escrow fees, while deleting it on other additions.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying additions leading to the penalty have been 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, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM.

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aggrieved by confirmation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09 by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai [CIT(A)] vide order dated 11.02.2016, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

Upon perusal of case records, it could be seen that the assessee was saddled with certain additions which were subjected to penalty proceedings by Ld. AO vide order dated 26.06.2012. The Ld. AO levied penalty of Rs.1964.65 Lacs for various additions as enumerated in the penalty order. 3. The assessee assailed the penalty with partial success before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 11.02.2016. The Ld. CIT(A) retained penalty on disallowance of consultancy charges and escrow fees. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. We find that both the disallowances against which the penalty has been retained by Ld. CIT(A) has been deleted by Tribunal in assessee’s appeal order dated 23.12.2022. Since quantum disallowances have been deleted, the consequential penalty would not survive. We order so. For this reason alone, all the other grounds including legal grounds taken by the assessee has been rendered infructuous. 5. The assessee’s appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 23rd December, 2022.

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 →