MR. MOHD JAVED MOD RAFIQUE SHEIKH,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 19(2)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4923/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 March 2021AY 2006-072 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum appeal was remitted, the penalty order related to the same addition should also be remitted to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is to consider the penalty after deciding the quantum appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty order under section 271(1)(c) confirmed by the CIT(A). The quantum appeal related to the same addition had been remitted by the ITAT to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) should be remitted to the Assessing Officer when the related quantum addition has been remitted for fresh consideration.

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, “D” Bench, Mumbai

For Appellant: Smt. Ranjana Gadge
For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle
Hearing: 09.03.2021Pronounced: 09.03.2021

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :-

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 27.5.2019, wherein penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act (in short Act) for Rs. 8,38,129/- was confirmed.

2.

At the outset, in this case learned counsel stated that in the quantum appeal the ITAT vide order dated 15.10.2019 in had remitted the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider the same afresh. Hence, learned counsel submitted that since the issue of addition has been remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer the penalty in this regard, also be remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer.

3.

Upon hearing both the counsel and perusing the record, we find that since the quantum appeal has been remitted by the ITAT to the file of the Assessing Officer, this penalty order with reference to said addition also deserves to be remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the 2 Mr. Mohd Javed Mod Rafique Sheikh issue regarding penalty also stands remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall consider the same after deciding upon the quantum appeal as remitted by the ITAT.

4.

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open court on 9.3.2021.

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 →