ZENITH ENGINEERING CORPORTION,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 33(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6411/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 January 2020AY 2008-093 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 original quantum assessment order was quashed, the penalty arising from it would not survive. Therefore, the penalty was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2008-09 challenged a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c). The penalty stemmed from a quantum assessment order which was subsequently annulled by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty can survive if the underlying assessment order is annulled by a higher authority.

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, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Vipul K. Mody-Ld
For Respondent: Shri N. Padmanabhan-Ld. DR

आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Zenith Engineering Corporation ACIT- Range-33(3) Daman b-902 Room No.409/C-13 बनाम/ Gokul Apartment, New Saibaba Nagar, Pratayaksh Kar Bhavan Vs. Borsapada, Kandivali West Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai -400 067. Mumbai- 400 051. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAAFZ-1582-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : S/Shri Nitesh Joshi & Vipul K. Mody-Ld. Ars Revenue by : Shri N. Padmanabhan-Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 08/01/2020 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 08/01/2020 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2008-09 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-45, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No.CIT(A)-45/ACIT-33(3)/ITA-49/2015-16 dated 21/06/2018 qua confirmation of penalty u/s 271(1)(C) for Rs.6,81,036/-. The impugned order is an ex-parte order.

2 Zenith Engineering Corporation Assessment Year :2008-09

2.

It is admitted position before us that impugned penalty levied by Ld. AO vide penalty order dated 31/03/2015 spring from quantum assessment order framed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 14/11/2011. Upon appeal against quantum assessment, the assessment has been annulled by Tribunal vide order dated 30/10/2017, a copy of which has been placed on record. In the above background, Ld. AR submitted since quantum order has been quashed by the Tribunal which is still in force and therefore, the penalty against the quantum order would not survive. The Ld. DR could not controvert the said position.

3.

In view of admitted position, since quantum assessment has been quashed by the Tribunal, the penalty arising out of the same, would also not survive. By deleting the same, we allow the appeal. Order pronounced in the open court on 08th January, 2020. (Ravish Sood) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) "ाियक सद" / Judicial Member लेखा सद" / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांक Dated : 08/01/2020 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese आदेशकी"ितिलिपअ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant 2. ""थ"/ The Respondent 3 Zenith Engineering Corporation Assessment Year :2008-09

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 →