RIVERSIDE PAPER MILLS PVT.LTD.,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4, SURAT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the issue leading to the penalty was set aside for fresh adjudication. Therefore, the penalty was not maintainable in its current form and was set aside to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2005-06. The issue on which the penalty was levied had previously been set aside by the Tribunal to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.
What were the issues?
Maintainability of penalty when the underlying issue has been set aside for re-adjudication. Whether the penalty can survive independently of the quantum appeal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
66 3TY 3tlaily 3f840T,4ra =4ryra , 3a IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT sf H.urof;, 74f4s 44+4 741 si 3.4t.Har, du Ha+y & HA8 BEFORE SHRI CM.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 31T.3T.&.I.T.A No.2357 /AHD/2015 ferur #d/Assessment Year 2005-06 Riverside Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd: Vs: Assistant Commissioner of Income c/o.JRS Patel & Co-, Tax, Chartered Accountants,1 06, Circle-4, Aayakar Bhavan, Anurag Commercial Centre, Surat. R.C Dutt Road, Alkapuri, Baroda 390 007 . PAN:AABCRI O4OH 3ralareff Appellant 9cyuf/Respondent fauffxat &1 3k # /Assessee by None written submissions filed: TTaFFa &1 3/ 4 /Revenue by Shri B. P_ K. Panda, Sr. D.R 47 at Tdl} 4 arl Date of hearing: 1 1.01.2018 3qulyu1T #1 <rTo Pronouncement 1 2.01.2108 1 on 9i8 HC8L [QRDER PER QPMEENA_ACCOUIANT MEMBER:
1 This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 01.07.2015 of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-Il, Surat (in short CIT(A)) and relates to assessment year 2005-06, in confirming the penalty of Rs.48,26,612/-u/s.271(1)c) of the Act: 2 At the outset of hearing before US, written submissions were filed by the learned Counsel for the assessee wherein it was submitted that the issue on which X; ' .. Riverside Paper Mill Pvt: Ltd. L.T.A: No.2357/Ahd/2015/A.Y.05-OE penalty was levied has been set-aside by the Tribunal to the file of CIT (A) with direction to re-adjudicate the appeal as afresh on merits after providing opportunity for hearing to the both parties vide ITA no. 1116/Ahd/2013 dated 12. 09. 2016. Therefore, it was urged upon to set-aside the captioned appeal to the file of CIT (A) in the larger interest of justice: 3 We have considered the written submissions and heard the Id. Sr. D.R: We find that the entire appeal has been set-aside to the file of the CIT (A) for re-adjudication of the issue afresh: Thus, the issue on which penalty levied stands set aside to the file of the CIT (A) for fresh decision by the order of Tribunal supra): Thus, the issue on which penalty is levied is no longer survived; therefore, penalty levied is not maintainable as of now. Accordingly, we set-aside this penalty appeal to the file of the CIT (A) for re-adjudication as and when the quantum appeal is decided by CIT(A) in pursuance of Tribunal Order(supra) 4_ In the result, the appeal of the assessee set-aside to the file of the CIT(A): Order pronounced in the open Court on 12mh day of January 2018. (t.vajaf) /(CM: GARG) (31t . #.Ha) /(O.P.MEENA) 741744 HGF4IJUDICIAL MEMBER cTut 7a+4/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER FTI Surat: faaly IDated 12th January 2018/OPM Copy sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT / CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT: # SeF By order 3 Uau} | [1 | 'gg/-l? Assistant Registrar, Surat: Vo 8at4en qoifor ar excity 3477 E7 7i4iia, 8a. 744r8
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
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026