M/S. ADVANCE GRP COOLING TOWERE PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-12(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5239/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 February 2021AY 2013-142 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 held that since the addition, which formed the basis for the penalty, was deleted by the ITAT in a prior order, the penalty order no longer survives. Consequently, the penalty was directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal is against a penalty order confirmed by the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2013-14. The penalty was levied based on an addition made to the assessee's income.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty order can survive if the underlying addition to income is deleted by a higher appellate authority.

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, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parikh
For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar
Hearing: 11/02/2021Pronounced: 11/02/2021

This is an appeal by the assessee directed against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Mumbai (in short ‘the CIT(A)’) passed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’), vide order dated 30.05.2019 and pertains to Assessment Year 2013-14, wherein he confirmed the penalty of Rs.5,04,442/-.

2.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that ITAT has deleted the addition with reference to which the penalty has been levied. In this regard, he referred to the ITAT decision in for M/s. Advance GRP Cooling Towers Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year 2013-14 vide order dated 17.07.2019. Hence, the learned counsel submitted that the penalty order does not survive.

3.

Per contra, the learned DR did not dispute the proposition.

4.

Upon careful consideration, we hold that as ITAT has deleted the addition with reference to which the penalty is levied, the penalty order of learned CIT(A) does not survive. Hence, we set-aside the order of authorities below and direct that the penalty be deleted.

5.

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11th February, 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 →