VIKRAM SUGRIV KALE,OSMANABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1,NANDED, NANDED

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2833/PUN/2025Status: HeardITAT Pune21 January 2026AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)6 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 once the quantum addition, which was the fundamental basis for the penalty under section 271AAC(1), had been deleted by the CIT(A), and this deletion was not appealed by the Revenue, the penalty itself could not survive. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s dismissal of the appeal to be hyper-technical, asserting that the AO should have *suo motu* deleted the penalty. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the penalty.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in manufacturing and contractor-ship, initially declared an income of Rs.52,02,470/-, but the Assessing Officer (AO) assessed it at Rs.86,63,652/- under sections 143(3), 143(3A), and 143(3B). The Ld. CIT(A) subsequently deleted this quantum addition. However, the AO had initiated and levied a penalty of Rs.2,67,376/- under section 271AAC(1). The assessee applied to the AO to cancel this penalty, arguing the basis (quantum addition) was deleted, but the AO rejected the application, deeming the power under section 275(1A) discretionary. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal against the AO's rejection, holding that it was an administrative action not appealable under section 246A.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty levied under section 271AAC(1) remains enforceable after the deletion of the underlying quantum addition by the CIT(A); and whether the CIT(A) correctly dismissed the appeal against the AO's refusal to cancel/modify the penalty order under section 275(1A) on grounds of jurisdiction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 143(3A),Section 143(3B),Section 271AAC(1),Section 275(1A),Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Rohit S Tapadiya
For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 21.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 21.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the 3 JM/AM Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the Office 9 Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 271AAC(1)

All 1,211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAC(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →