VATSAL HOTELS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4716/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 February 2020AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum appeal was remanded, the penalty order also does not survive at this stage. The penalty order is therefore remanded back to the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the penalty order. The quantum appeal for the same assessment year was previously remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty order can survive when the underlying quantum appeal has been remanded for fresh adjudication. Whether the penalty was initiated without specifying the specific limb of default.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES ‘Friday’, NEW DELHI

Before: Ms. Sushma ChowlaDr. B. R. R. Kumar

Hearing: 31.01.2020Pronounced: 04.02.2020

Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (A)-28, New Delhi dated 29.03.2019.

2.

Following relevant grounds have been raised by the assessee: “1 Because, order of Id. lower Id. CIT(A) is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.

2 Because, the learned lower authority erred in sustaining penalty without appreciating that penalty is initiated without specifying the specific limb in which assessee is presumed to be defaulted which is against the law laid down in case of Manjunath Cotton and Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565(Karnataka) and approved by hon'ble Apex Court in case of SSA's EMRALD MEADOWS.”

Vatsal Hotels Pvt. Ltd. 3. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record.

4.

The quantum appeal in the instant case stands decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in ITA No. 7696/Del./2018 remanded the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate on the core issue after affording opportunity to the assessee. Hence, at this juncture, the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer does not survive. Keeping in view, the order of the Tribunal in the quantum proceedings, the penalty order is also hereby remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer to alter/modify/amend/vary depending upon the outcome in the quantum proceedings.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 04/02/2020.

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 →