SHREE M.D. WEAVES,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(2)(1), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2449/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 January 2018AY 2003-042 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 underlying issue on which the penalty was levied was set aside, the penalty was no longer maintainable. Therefore, the penalty was deleted, with the liberty for the AO to re-initiate penalty proceedings if warranted after the finalization of the set-aside assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2003-04. The penalty was based on an issue that had been set aside by the Tribunal to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh consideration.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of a penalty when the assessment issue on which it was based had been set aside for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.2449 of 2015 1 Shree M.D Weaves 31Tyonr3rrciy3rfe4zu, 4rTGurrT, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT sih.U.ari,>-4If4cqF4areTeft3t.4t.3 HaT, duN4F4tHF&T BEFORE SHRI CM.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ANC SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 31T.3T.FT.II.T.A No.2449/Ahd/2015 ferurad/Assessment Year 2003-04 Shree M.D. Weaves Vs-| Income Tax Officer , B-141,_ Uma Industries Estate, Ward -1 (2)(1), Udhana Bhatena, Udhana, Surat Surat-394210 PAN AAPFSIO68M 3riarifAppellant Trff/Respondent Aunda334 /Assessee by {ToTFdah3ht /Revenue by Shri Vijay Mehta, CA Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr: D.R: 3Tar-hario/ Date of hearing: 12.01.2018 3quiquir-FlarTu /Pronouncement on 12.01.2018 H48 [Q RDER PER QP MEENA ACCQUTANI MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dated of 15.04.2015 Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-Il, Surat (in short CIT(A)) and relates to assessment 7. , year 2003-04, in confirming penalty of Rs.2,06,540/- under section 271 (1) (C) of the 2 At the out set of hearing before Us, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue on which penalty was levied has been set-aside by the Tribunal the file of AO for fresh consideration, vide ITA No. 897/Ahd/2013 dated 20.01.2017. Act. ITA No.2449 of 2015 2 Shree M.D Weaves 3 We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the issue of capital treated as unexplained cash credit and capital introduction on which penalty levied stands to set aside to the file of the AO 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 delete the penalty so levied subject to condition that the AO is free to re-initiate penalty proceedings under section 271 (1 Jc) of the Act, on finalization of set-aside assessment proceedings, if the circumstances so warrant or he thinks it fit: 3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed: Order was pronounced in the open court on 12.01.2018. - ~ CMGARG) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) S41 (O.P. MEENA) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Dated: 12.01.2018 Copy to: Appellant, Respondent, CIT(A) Pr. CIT, DR, Surat By Order zo/z)k Assistant Registrar 1en47 teiR 8F4" exklv aifzv T = aadla, Ta.

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 →