ACIT CIRCLE-3 KALYAN, KALYAN vs. SHANKESHWAR KREATORS, KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6746/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 March 2021AY 2011-123 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 held that the CBDT circular relied upon by the Revenue applies only to quantum assessment proceedings and not to penalty proceedings. Penalty and assessment proceedings are distinct.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) concerning disallowance of bogus purchases. The Revenue argued that the penalty should be levied, citing a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether a CBDT circular intended for quantum assessment proceedings can be applied to penalty proceedings. The distinction between assessment and penalty proceedings.

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, ‘E‘ BENCH

Before: SHRI C.N.PRASAD, AM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain
For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Menon, Shri Jitendra Jain
Hearing: 15/03/2021Pronounced: 15/03/2021

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):

1.

This appeal in A.Y.2011-12 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Thane in appeal No.10060/2017-18 dated 02/08/2019 (ld. CIT(A) in short) in the matter of imposition of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

The ld. DR argued vehemently that the penalty levied by the ld. AO in respect of disallowance made on bogus purchases. Accordingly, in the opinion of the ld. DR, the same would fall within the exception provided in the CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019. We find that the exception provided in the said Circular dated 08/08/2019 issued by the CBDT would apply only in respect of quantum assessment proceeding and the same cannot be made applicable for penalty proceeding and it is well settled that penalty proceeding and assessment proceedings are distinct and separate. In view of this, we are inclined to treat this appeal as not maintainable in view of the CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 treating it as an appeal involving tax effect less than the prescribed monetary limit.

3.

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed as not maintainable.

Order pronounced in open Court on 15/03/2021

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 →