RAMA SUNIL KERKAR,RADHANAGARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, KOLHAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1539/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 July 2025AY 2019-20Bench: Dr. MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the addition forming the basis of the penalty was deleted in a previous order, the penalty had no legs to stand. Therefore, the penalty order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) confirming a penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) for AY 2019-20. The penalty was based on an addition made under Section 69 of the Act, which was subsequently deleted by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) is sustainable when the addition on which it was based has been deleted by the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271AAC(1),Section 115BB(E),Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B BENCH, PUNE

Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. Shingte
For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva
Hearing: 30.07.2025

Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 30.07.2025 Date of : 07.08.2025 pronouncement आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, dated 07.06.2025 framed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2019-20 which is arising out of penalty order levied u/s 271AAC(1) dated 12.07.2024 framed by Assessment unit Income Tax Department.

2.

Sole grievance of the assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing of the appeal thereby confirming penalty u/s 271AAC of the Act at Rs. 38,746/- calculated on the Tax payable u/s 115BB(E) of the Act on the addition of Rs. 6,45,781/- made u/s 69 of the Act.

3.

At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition on which the impugned penalty has been calculated, stands deleted by this Hon’ble Tribunal in ITA 1538/PUN/2025 dated 10.07.2025. Copy of order placed on record. On the other hand Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of Ld. CIT(A).

4.

We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The impugned penalty has been levied on the Tax calculated u/s 69 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act on the addition of Rs. 6,45,781/- made u/s 69 of the Act. We find that this Tribunal has deleted the quantum addition vide ITA 1538/PUN/2025 order dated 10.07.2025. Since the basis of levying penalty i.e. addition already stands deleted, the impugned penalty has no legs to stand. We therefore set aside the impugned order and delete the penalty levied u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated above.

5.

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced on this 07th day of August, 2025.

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दििांक / Dated: 07th August, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to:

1. 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

More judgments on Section 271AAC(1)

All 1,211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAC(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →