M/S. CHAWLA JEWELLERS,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1013/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2019AY 2010-114 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 restored the penalty appeal to the Assessing Officer. This was done because the quantum appeal was already restored, allowing the Assessing Officer to initiate penalty proceedings afresh if warranted after deciding the quantum.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's quantum appeal for the same assessment year had previously been restored to the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be restored to the Assessing Officer when the related quantum appeal has been restored.

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, DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv
For Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Hearing: 28.05.2019Pronounced: 31.05.2019

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.1.2016 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi for assessment year 2010-11 wherein, vide the impugned order, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has upheld the imposition of penalty of Rs. 26,45,510/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). Assessment year 2010-11 2.0 At the outset, the Ld. Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the quantum appeal of the assessee for the year under consideration has already been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer vide order dated 2.4.2019 in ITA No. 1028/Del/2013. Drawing our attention to Para 8 of the said order, which was placed on record, the Ld. AR submitted that since the quantum appeal has been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, the penalty matter also should go back to the Assessing Officer.

3.0 The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative (DR) had no objection to the assessee’s appeal being restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in view of the quantum appeal having been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer.

4.0 Having heard the rival submissions and the contentions and keeping in view the fact that the assessee’s quantum appeal has since been restored by a Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in vide order dated 02.04.2019, it is our considered opinion that it will be in the fitness of things if the penalty appeal is also restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we restore this appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer with the liberty to initiate penalty ITA No. 1013/D/2016 Assessment year 2010-11 proceedings afresh, if it is so warranted, once the quantum has been decided afresh.

5.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31st May, 2019.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →