SHRI RAM NIVAS,GURGAON vs. ITO, GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1486/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 January 2019AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum issues were restored to the Assessing Officer, the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) had become infructuous. The appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh decision after the quantum issues were resolved.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty of Rs. 6,82,630/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c). The ITAT had previously restored the quantum issues for the same assessment year to the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can survive when the underlying quantum additions are restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

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: ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, HON’BLE & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Respondent: Shri Sridhar Dora, Sr.DR
Hearing: 26.11.2018Pronounced: 16.01.2019

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against order dated 08.01.2016 passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-1, Gurgaon for assessment year 2009-10 wherein, vide the impugned order, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has upheld the imposition of penalty of Rs. 6,82,630/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) .

2.

At the time of the hearing, the Ld. Authorised Representative appearing for the assessee filed copy of the ITAT’s order in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2009-10 in ITA nos.

1.

1977/Del/2014 and 6696/Del/2016 and submitted that the ITAT, vide order dated 14th August, 2018, has restored the quantum issues to the file of the Assessing Officer. It was submitted that in view of the quantum appeal/s having been restored to the file of the AO, the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) had become in fructuous. It was submitted that the penalty imposed should be deleted.

3.

The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative could not controvert the fact that the Cross Appeals by the department and the assessee pertaining to the quantum additions had been restored to the file of the AO.

4.

Accordingly, in view of the quantum appeals having been restored to the file of the AO, we restore this appeal also to the file of the Assesing Officer to be decided afresh after giving due opportunity to the assessee to present his case once the quantum issues have been decided by the Assessing Officer.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 16.01.2019.

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 →