M/S. ASHIMA SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the re-assessment orders were set aside and all additions were deleted, there was no basis left for levying the penalty. Consequently, the penalty orders were cancelled.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessments were reopened under Section 148, leading to penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee had appealed the quantum orders, and the Tribunal had previously quashed the re-assessment proceedings.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the validity of the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) when the underlying re-assessment proceedings were quashed by the Tribunal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “A”: DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
Learned Counsel for the Assessee at the outset submitted that in both the assessment years under appeals, assessments were reopened under section 148 of the I.T. Act which resulted into levy of the penalty. He has submitted that assessee preferred appeals before the ITAT, Delhi A- Bench against the quantum Orders in ITA.Nos.3400 & 3401/Del./2013 for assessment years under appeals in which the Tribunal has quashed the re-assessment proceedings vide Order dated 29.09.2017, copy of the order is placed on record. He has, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in such circumstances.
The Ld. D.R. did not dispute this fact.
Considering the above fact and that since re- assessment orders are set aside and entire additions have been deleted by the Tribunal as noted above, no basis is left for levy of the penalty against the assessee. We, accordingly,
3 ITA.No.1282 & 1281/Del./2017 Ashima Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. set aside the Orders of the authorities below and cancel the penalty.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026