ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MANGALMURTI DEVELOPERS, KOLHAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1168/PUN/2016Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 September 2018AY 2011-123 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The deletion of penalty was upheld as the tax effect was below the prescribed limit and the issue on merits had been decided in favour of the assessee in a previous appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) was correctly deleted by the CIT(A), considering the tax effect and prior tribunal decisions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Ms. Sabana Parveen
Hearing: 25.09.2018Pronounced: 25.09.2018

आदेश / ORDER

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM:

The appeal filed by Revenue is against order of CIT(A)-2, Kolhapur, dated 11.03.2016 relating to assessment year 2011-12 against order passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

ITA No.1168/PUN/2016 2 Mangalmurti Developers

2.

The perusal of records show that the issue raised in the appeal filed by Revenue is against deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act at ₹ 11,13,615/-.

3.

Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of assessee nor any application for adjournment was moved. We proceed to decide the present appeal because of low tax effect and also because the issue on merits has been decided in favour of assessee.

4.

On perusal of record and after hearing the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue, it transpires that tax effect in the present appeal against deletion of penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is less than the limit prescribed by the CBDT vide Circular No.3/2018, dated 11.07.2018. Hence, the appeal of Revenue is not maintainable. In any case, the issue raised on merits has been decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s favour in ITA No.1220/PUN/2015, relating to assessment year 2011-12, order dated 25.01.2018. Consequent thereto, the basis for levy of penalty is also absent. Hence, we dismiss the appeal filed by Revenue.

5.

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in open Court on this 25th day of September, 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याययक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक Dated : 25th September, 2018. GCVSR

ITA No.1168/PUN/2016 3 Mangalmurti Developers

आदेश की प्रयतलऱपप अग्रेपषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant; 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent; 2. आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A)-2, Kolhapur; 3. 4. The CIT-II, Kolhapur; ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे “ए” / DR 5. ‘A’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गार्ड पाईऱ / Guard file. आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्यावऩत प्रतत //True Copy// वररष्ठ तनजी सधिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण ,ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune

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 →