SHRI SUDHAKAR M. SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1712/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 April 2022AY 2012-133 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 quantum addition on which the penalty was based has been deleted, the penalty cannot be sustained. Therefore, the penalty levied under Section 271AAA is to be deleted.

What were the facts?

During a search, cash and jewellery were found and added to the assessee's income. A penalty was levied under Section 271AAA. Subsequently, the quantum addition for the cash and jewellery was deleted by a coordinate bench.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271AAA can be sustained when the underlying quantum addition has been deleted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAA,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HONBLE & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HONBLEShri Sudhakar M. Shetty v. Shri S.N.Kabra

For Respondent: Shri S.N.Kabra
Hearing: 28.01.2022Pronounced: 06.04.2022

O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM)

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 52, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 02.09.2016 for the A.Y.2012-13.

2.

Brief facts of the case are, assessee filed his return of income on 25.09.2013 declaring total income of ₹.9,78,960/-, search action u/s. 132

(A.Y: 2012-13) Shri Sudhakar M. Shetty of the Act was conducted by DDIT (Investigation), Unit-IV-4, Mumbai on 22.09.2011 at the business premises of the assessee who is the key person of Sahana Group. The assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act in this case was completed on 24.03.2014 determining the total income at ₹.2,20,79,050/-. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹.13 lakhs on account of cash balance found during the course of search and ₹.14,99,084/- on account of jewellery found during the course of the search. Accordingly, penalty proceedings u/s. 271AAA of the Act were initiated and subsequently penalty was levied u/s. 271AAA to the extent of ₹.2,79,910/-. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the penalty.

3.

Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before us and at the time of hearing it is brought to our notice that the corresponding quantum addition of ₹.27,99,084/- made u/s. 69A of the Act was subsequently deleted by the Coordinate Bench vide M.A. order 617/Mum/2018 dated 20.11.2018 thereby no pending issue of any undisclosed income of the assessee. Therefore Ld. AR prayed that the penalty levied deserves to be deleted.

4.

On the other hand, Ld.DR fairly accepted that in Miscellaneous Application, the ITAT had deleted the quantum addition.

(A.Y: 2012-13) Shri Sudhakar M. Shetty 5. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, since the quantum addition is already deleted by the Coordinate Bench, we do not find any reason to sustain the penalty on the above said addition made u/s. 69A of the Act. Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 06.04.2022.

More judgments on Section 271AAA

All 606 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →