DCIT(IT)-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VENU RAMAN KUMAR, MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty. It reasoned that once the substratum for the penalty (the quantum addition) was removed, the penalty proceedings could not survive.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c). The penalty was based on an addition made in quantum proceedings, which was subsequently deleted by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying quantum addition has been deleted. The validity of penalty proceedings when the basis for their initiation is nullified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY
आदेश/ ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY,JM:
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-57, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] dated 11/03/2019 for the assessment year 2006-07.
We have heard the submissions made by ld. Departmental Representative and have perused the documents on record. The Assessing Officer vide assessment order dated 31/03/2015 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’), made addition on account of undisclosed income and also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act . Thereafter, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 30/09/2015 levied penalty @300% of the tax sought to be evaded. The assessee filed appeal against the penalty order. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty as in the quantum proceedings, the entire quantum addition was deleted by the First Appellate Authority. The Revenue filed appeal in before the Tribunal assailing the order of CIT(A) in deleting the addition in quantum proceedings. The Tribunal vide order dated 19/06/2019 dismissed the appeal of Revenue. Once substratum for levy of penalty has eroded, the penalty proceedings does not survive. We concur with the findings of CIT(A) and uphold the same. The appeal of the Revenue is without any merit, hence, the same is dismissed.
In the result appeal by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on Tuesday the 23rd day of February, 2021.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026