SUKHBIRI DEVI,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5105/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 February 2019AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the penalty issue to the AO for adjudication afresh. This was to be done in light of the decision in the assessee's quantum appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's quantum appeal for AY 2012-13 was restored to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication. The assessee argued that the penalty appeal should also be restored to the AO for similar reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be restored to the AO for fresh adjudication following the restoration of the quantum appeal.

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 ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. N. S. Saini

Hearing: 04.02.2019Pronounced: 05.02.2019

ORDER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Meerut dated 18.05.2018.

2.

The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of penalty of Rs.2,99,524/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3.

The AR of the assessee during the course of hearing submitted before me that the quantum appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 has been restored back by the Tribunal to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh. Hence, this appeal should also be restored back to the file of the AO for adjudication afresh in light of the decision taken in quantum appeal of the assessee in the set aside proceedings.

2 Sukhbiri Devi 4. The ld. DR had no objection to the above submissions of the AR of the assessee.

5.

In the above facts and circumstances of the case, I set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restore the matter to the file of the AO to adjudicate the issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in light of the decision taken in the quantum appeal of the assessee in the setting aside proceedings. Thus, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 05/02/2019).

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 →