ACIT, CIRCLE- 59(1), NEW DELHI vs. RAJ KUMAR CHAWLA, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 798/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 August 2020AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal affirmed the deletion of the penalty. It was noted that the additions, which formed the basis for the penalty, had already been deleted by the Tribunal in earlier proceedings.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of a penalty of Rs. 72,33,590/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c). The penalty was based on additions made in the quantum proceedings for the assessment year 2010-11.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying additions forming its basis have been deleted by the Tribunal.

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, DELHI BENCH FRIDAY BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR

PER G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT

1.

This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-27, New Delhi dated 9.11.2018 for assessment year 2010-11 whereby the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') of Rs. 72,33,590/- has been deleted.

2.

At the time of hearing, the ld. representative for the assessee pointed out that the additions made in the quantum proceedings in the instant assessment year, which have given rise to the impugned imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act have since been deleted Assessment year 2010-11 in entirety by the Tribunal vide its order in ITA No. 1323/Del/2015 dated 26.09.2018.

3.

As a consequence of the aforesaid, say of the assessee is that the instant imposition of penalty even otherwise does not survive.

4.

The aforesaid factual matrix is not in dispute and it is also pointed out that the order of the Tribunal dated 26.09.2018 (supra) continues to hold the field.

5. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid discussion, without going into the merits of the levy of penalty, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) deleting the penalty is hereby affirmed, albeit on a different ground. Ostensibly, with the deletion of additions by the Tribunal vide order dated 26.09.2018 (supra), the very basis of the impugned penalty proceedings does not survive.

5.

Resultantly, the appeal of the department is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the presence of both the parties at the conclusion of virtual hearing today.

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 →