VIKRAM BHARDWAJ,NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD- 2(5), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3413/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 January 2020AY 2009-102 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the quantum appeal, which formed the basis for the penalty, had been restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. As all additions were set aside in the quantum appeal, the penalty proceedings arising from those additions could not be sustained.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2009-10. The penalty amount was Rs. 2,51,80,925/-.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying additions have been set aside and the quantum appeal is restored for fresh adjudication.

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 “F” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA

For Appellant: Adv. &, Shri Abhishek Kumar, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr.D.R

PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 30.11.2018 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, NOIDA for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.271(1)(c) for the Assessment Year 2009-10. In the grounds of appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds. The assessee is mainly aggrieved by levy of penalty at Rs.2,51,80,925/-.

1.

2. Since in the quantum appeal, the matter has been restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to be decided afresh and all the additions have been set aside, therefore, penalty proceedings arising from such an addition cannot be sustained and same is directed to be deleted.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 17th January, 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 →