Loading judgment…
Facts
Revenue filed appeals against orders of CIT(A) which deleted penalties imposed by AO. The penalties were levied on additions made in assessment orders, which were later deleted by the ITAT. The revenue argued that penalties should survive pending appeals before the High Court.
Held
The Tribunal held that the levy of penalty is linked to the additions made in the assessment order. If the addition itself does not subsist, the penalty cannot stand. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s orders.
Key Issues
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can survive if the additions on which it was based have been deleted by a higher appellate authority?
Sections Cited
271(1)(c), 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per Bench:
The captioned three (3) appeals by revenue are directed against three separate orders of first-appeal, all dated 06.01.2025 and passed by learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arise out of respective penalty-orders dated 18.03.2016/31.03.2017 passed by learned ACIT/DCIT-2(1), Bhopal u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for assessment-years [“AY”] 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13.
Madhya Pradesh Police Housing Corporation ltd. to 402/Ind/2025 Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2012-13
When these matters were called, none appeared on behalf of assessee/respondent nor any application seeking adjournment is filed. Hence, the matters were passed over and at the end of Board, the matters were again called but still the status remained same. On perusal of impugned orders, it was found that these matters can be decided on the basis of available material after hearing Ld. DR for revenue/appellant. Therefore, the hearings were continued and these matters are being disposed of by this common order.
Delay of 52 days in filing each of these appeals by revenue are condoned having regard to the submissions made in Interlocutory Applications supported by affidavits filed by revenue/appellant.
Precisely stated, the facts of these appeals are such that the cases of assessee of three AYs 2010-11 to 2012-13 were subjected to scrutiny- assessments and the AO passed assessment-orders dated 14.02.2013/ 10.11.2014 u/s 143(3) after making certain additions. Against such assessment-orders, the assessee went in appellate proceedings upto ITAT, Indore [“Quantum-appeals”] challenging the additions made by AO and the ITAT deleted those additions vide orders dated 11.10.2018. On other side, the AO passed penalty-orders u/s 271(1)(c) on 18.03.2016/31.03.2017 imposing penalties qua the additions made in assessment-orders, therefore the assessee also went in separate appeals against impugned penalty-orders before CIT(A).
The CIT(A) deleted penalties by passing following order:
Madhya Pradesh Police Housing Corporation ltd. to 402/Ind/2025 Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2012-13
“4.3.1 On further appeal by the appellant, the Hon. ITAT vide its order in for A.Y. 2008-09, 259 & 260/Ind/2015 for A.Y. 2010-11 and 11-12; 449/Ind/2016 for A.Y. 2012-13 and 125/Ind/2017 for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 11.10.2018 directed the AO to delete the addition. Since the quantum addition has been deleted by the Hon. ITAT in their order dated 11.10.2018, the penalty levied on the basis of quantum addition also ceases to exist. Therefore, the present appeal filed against penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) is allowed.” Now, the revenue has come in next appeals before ITAT impugning the orders of CIT(A).
Ld. DR for revenue could not point out any mistake in the orders passed by Ld. CIT(A) except to iterate the ground raised by revenue claiming that the revenue has already filed appeals to Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court against ITAT’s orders in Quantum-appeals. Therefore, the impugned orders passed by CIT(A) deleting the penalties imposed by AO must be set aside.
We have considered submission of Ld. DR and carefully perused the case record including impugned orders of first-appeals passed by CIT(A). We observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has given relief qua the additions deleted. On a careful reading of section 271(1)(c), we observe that the levy of penalty as well calculation-formula of the penalty contemplated therein is linked with the addition made in assessment-order. If the addition itself does not subsist, neither the levy of the penalty has legs to stand nor the calculation of amount of penalty. Due to this position of law, we do not find any merit in the submission of revenue that the penalties must survive with respect to the additions deleted, during the pendency of revenue’s Quantum-appeals before 3
Madhya Pradesh Police Housing Corporation ltd. to 402/Ind/2025 Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2012-13 Hon’ble High Court. Therefore, we are in agreement with the order passed by Ld. CIT(A). In that view of matter, we do not find any infirmity or fallacy in the order of Ld. CIT(A). Hence, we uphold the same and dismiss these appeals of revenue which are devoid of any merit.
Before parting, we make it clear that in case the revenue succeeds in its pending appeals before Hon’ble High Court, then the AO shall be at liberty and entitled to re-initiate penalty proceedings as per relevant provisions of the act and the rules made thereunder in accordance with the outcome of the judgement of Hon’ble High Court.
In the result, these appeals of revenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced in open court on 28/11/2025