M/S. VIPUL MOTORS PVT. LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the quantum additions, which formed the basis for the penalty, had been deleted by a co-ordinate bench in favor of the assessee, the penalty itself must also be deleted. The foundation for the penalty was removed.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for Assessment Years 2003-04 and 2004-05. The penalty was levied based on certain additions made by the Assessing Officer.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying additions forming the basis for the penalty have been deleted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & SMT BEENA A. PILLAI&
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER,
These two separate appeals by the assessee are preferred against two separate orders of the CIT(A) - 19, New Delhi dated 07.07.2014 pertaining to A.Ys 2003-04 & 2004-05.
In both these appeals, the assessee aggrieved by the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' amounting to Rs. 5,51,250/- in A.Y 2003-04 and Rs. 37,287/- in A.Y 2004-05.
At the very outset, the ld. AR stated that the quantum additions which were challenged before the Tribunal have been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The ld. AR provided copy of the order of the Tribunal dated 23.05.2018.
The ld. DR could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the Revenue.
We have considered the orders of the authorities below and have duly taken into consideration the order of the co ordinate bench in & 5218/DEL/2013. We find force in the contention of the ld. AR. The additions which form basis for levy of penalty u/s 27191)(c) of the Act have been deleted by the Tribunal in the aforementioned order. Since the foundation has been removed, the super structure must fall. The AO is directed to delete the penalty levied in the respective A.Ys.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in & 5078/DEL/2013 are allowed.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 05.07.2018.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026