Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal is against the order of the CIT(A) which upheld the assessment order passed by the DCIT under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2011-12.
Held
The Tribunal held that given the Coordinate Bench's decision allowing the quantum appeal for the same assessment year, the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) became infructuous and the appeal was dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) are infructuous when the underlying assessment has been decided in favour of the assessee by a higher authority.
Sections Cited
250, 271(1)(c), 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI
Before: Ms. MADHUMITA ROY
(Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rajeshwar Painuly, CA Revenue by : Shri Nitin Kumar Jaiman, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 03.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 11.03.2026 ORDER PER MADHUMITA ROYA, JM:
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.10.2025 of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the assessment order dated 26.03.2022 passed by the DCIT, Central Circle-17, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. AO’) under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for Assessment Year 2011- 12.
Having regard to the order passed by the Coordinate Bench in for AY 2011-12, allowing the quantum appeal preferred by the assessee, the impugned proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act against the assessee before us is found to be infructuous and, hence, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous.