SHRENO LIMITED,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4, BARODA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the additions made to the assessee's income, which formed the basis for the penalty, were deleted by a previous Tribunal order, the penalty was non-est and thus cancelled. Consequently, the assessee's appeal was allowed and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) on the assessee for disallowance under Section 14A and foreign travelling expenses. The assessee and Revenue filed cross-appeals against the CIT(A)'s order regarding the penalty.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the additions forming the basis for the penalty have been deleted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The assessee and Revenue are in cross-appeals against the order of the learned CIT(A)-2, Vadodara dated 16.02.2015 passed for Assessment Year 2008-09.
The grievances in the respective appeals relate to confirmation/deletion of penalty which was levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
It emerges out from the record that the Assessing Officer visited the assessee with the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act on two counts; (a) disallowance u/s 14A of the Act for Rs. 77,45,350/- and (b) foreign
ITA Nos. 1186 & 1271/Ahd/2015 ACIT Vs. M/s. Shreno Limited AY : 2008-09 2
travelling expenses amounting to Rs.9,74,612/-. With regard to the deletion of penalty on disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, the Department is in appeal and with regard to confirmation of penalty on disallowance on account of foreign travelling expenditure, the assessee is in appeal before us.
At the time of hearing before us, it has been brought to our notice that both the aforesaid additions have been deleted by the Tribunal vide ITA No. 1452/Ahd/2012, decided on 27.12.2016. Copy of the Tribunal’s order has been placed on record. We find that sub-clause (iii) of Section 271(1)(c) provides mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable him, which shall not be less than, but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. In other words, the quantification of the penalty is depended upon the additions made to the income of the assessee. Since basis for visiting the assessee with penalty has been extinguished by deleting additions by the Tribunal in its order dated 27.12.2016 (supra) in the quantum appeal of the assessee, the impugned penalty is non est, and accordingly penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act stands cancelled. Appeal of the assessee is thus allowed and that of Revenue is dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed; whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Court on 5th April, 2018 at Ahmedabad.
Sd/- Sd/-
(PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 05/04/2018 *Biju T., Sr. PS
ITA Nos. 1186 & 1271/Ahd/2015 ACIT Vs. M/s. Shreno Limited AY : 2008-09 3
आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 5. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6.
देशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार देशानुसार देशानुसार
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026