PARISHA C. VARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(2)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4547/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 July 2020AY 2007-084 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 quantum additions/disallowances were restored for fresh assessment, the penalties levied on such additions would not survive. Therefore, the penalty orders were set aside and remitted to the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against penalties levied under section 271(1)(c) for multiple assessment years. The appeals against the quantum additions/disallowances had been restored to the Assessing Officer for denovo assessment by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether penalties under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying additions/disallowances are restored for denovo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 143,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HONBLE & SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HONBLE

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Parikh, Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora
Hearing: 06.02.2020Pronounced: 31.07.2020

O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against different orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 53, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 16.05.2018 for the A.Ys. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 in sustaining the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act.

2 4547 & 4548/MUM/2018 Parish C. Varia 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that appeals against quantum additions/disallowances made while completing the assessment u/s. 143 r.w.s. 147 of the Act were restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to make denovo assessment by the Tribunal in ITA.Nos.2139 to 2141/Mum/2015 dated 25.02.2019, a copy of the order is also furnished. Referring to the said order, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that since the appeals against quantum additions/disallowances were restored to the file of the Assessing Officer the penalties levied by Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld.CIT(A) will not survive.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the decision of the Tribunal. On a perusal of the order, we find that the Tribunal restored the quantum additions/disallowances to Assessing Officer for all these three assessment years for making denovo assessment. As the Tribunal restored the additions/disallowance to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessments the penalties levied on such additions/disallowances will not survive. Thus, we set-aside the penalty orders and remit the same to the file of the Assessing Officer.

5.

Before parting, we noticed that this appeal was heard on 06.02.2020 and the pronouncement is delayed due to lockdown in view of COVID-19 pandemic. The pronouncement is as per Rule 34(5) of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 and Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision vide orders dated 15.04.2020 and 15.06.2020 extending the time bound periods specified by Hon'ble High Court by removing the period under lockdown. This aspect was also dealt with in detail by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in case of DCIT v. JSW Steel Vide order dated 15.05.2020.

Order pronounced on 31.07.2020 as per Rule 34(4) of ITAT Rules by placing the pronouncement list in the notice board.

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 →