JT. CIT (OSD) CIRCLE- 2(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S STOCK TRADERS P. LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1816/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 November 2021AY 1999-20003 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that since the quantum appeal was settled under the VSV Scheme, the penalty appeal becomes infructuous. Therefore, the penalty appeal is dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 1999-2000. The original quantum appeal was settled by the assessee under the Voluntary Settlement Scheme (VSV).

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty appeal becomes infructuous when the underlying quantum appeal is settled under a voluntary settlement scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Respondent: Mr. B.K. Bagchi, DR
Hearing: 16/11/2021Pronounced: 16/11/2021

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. The present appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 1999-2000 dated 19.02.2020 and arises out of assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

2.

At the outset, it is noticed that none appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of calls and even no application for adjournment was moved. On the other hand, Ld. DR is present in the court and is ready with arguments. Therefore, we

M/s Stock Traders Pvt. Ltd. 2 have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte with the assistance of the Ld. DR and the material placed on record.

3.

At the time of hearing, it is brought to our notice that this appeal pertains to penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It is levied on the quantum appeal which was settled by the assessee under VSV Scheme and the same was accepted by the Revenue. Accordingly, the assessee has paid the relevant tax. In support of the above claim, the AR of the assessee filed the relevant Forms 1 to 5 under VSV Scheme. The above appeal was pending before the Hon’ble High Court. Since the assessee preferred to settle the quantum appeal under VSV Scheme. The relevant penalty appeal pending before us becomes infructuous. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 16/11/2021. (C.N. PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 16/11/2021 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1.

The Appellant

2.

The Respondent.

3.

The CIT(A)-

4.

CIT

5.

DR, ITAT, Mumbai

6.

Guard file.

M/s Stock Traders Pvt. Ltd. 3 BY ORDER, //// (Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Mumbai

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 →