AVDESH KUMAR,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 748/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 August 2018AY 2013-142 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 noted that the addition made by the Assessing Officer, which formed the basis for the penalty, had been deleted in a separate appeal. Therefore, the penalty was cancelled as its foundation no longer existed.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer levied a penalty on the assessee for non-disclosure of salary received from a foreign employer, which was reflected in the assessee's bank account and Form 26AS. The CIT(A) upheld this penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is sustainable when the underlying addition to income has been deleted.

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: SHRI R. K. PANDA

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR

Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Department by : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 02-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 02-08-2018 O R D E R

PER R. K. PANDA, AM :

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.10.2017 of CIT(A), Ghaziabad relating to assessment year 2013-14.

2.

The assessee in his grounds of appeal

has challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the penalty of Rs.5,28,298/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

3. After hearing both the sides, I find the Assessing Officer had levied penalty of Rs.5,28,298/- on account of addition of Rs.17,09,702/- to the total income of the assessee on account of non-disclosure of salary received outside India from the foreign employer which was credited to the bank account of the assessee and which appeared in the form of 26AS statement. I find ld. CIT(A) sustained the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. In the mean time, the Tribunal vide order dated 30.07.2018 has deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the ld. CIT(A).

Therefore, the very basis on which the penalty was levied does not survive.

Accordingly, the penalty so levied by the Assessing Officer and upheld the ld. CIT(A) is cancelled.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on this 02nd August, 2018.

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 →