SUSHEELA BAMB,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 5(1), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1995/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2022AY 2012-133 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the quantum appeal being settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme rendered the current penalty appeal infructuous. Without delving into the merits, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee's representative stated that the quantum appeal had been resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty appeal becomes infructuous if the underlying quantum appeal is settled under a tax dispute resolution scheme.

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, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh Khandelwal
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Assessee by Shri Neelesh Khandelwal Revenue by Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of hearing 31-05-2022 Date of pronouncement 31-05-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17-10-2019 passed by the CIT(A)-4, Pune confirming the penalty of Rs.1,54,93,953 imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in relation to the assessment year 2012-13.

2.

At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the appeal under consideration has become infructuous because the quantum appeal has gone under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The ld. DR fairly accepted the factual position stated on behalf of the assessee.

Under these circumstances and without going into merits, we dismiss the appeal as having become infructuous. 3. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 31st May, 2022.

Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; ददिधांक Dated : 31st May, 2022 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent; 2.

3.

The CIT(A)-4, Pune 4. The Pr.CIT-3, Pune 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, पुणे “B” / DR „B‟, ITAT, Pune गार्ड फाईल / Guard file 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

Date 1. Draft dictated on 31-05-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 31-05-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the JM second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second JM Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *

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 →