VIJAY KUMAR KUSHWAHA,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, WARD- 2, HARIDWAR
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal as the quantum appeal had been set aside for fresh adjudication. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the penalty levied by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee subsequently sought to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is sustainable when the quantum appeal is set aside for denovo assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2006-07 VIJAY KUMAR KUSHWAHA, ITO, HARIDWAR Vs. WARD-2, HARIDWAR PAN : ADPPK0311E (Appellant) (Respondent) : Assessee by None Revenue by : Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 25-10-2017 Date of pronouncement : 27-10-2017 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19th November, 2012 of the CIT(A)- Dehradun relating to assessment year 2006-07. 2. Levy of penalty of Rs. 6,46,920/- by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 and confirmed by the CIT(A) is the only issue raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal
3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset filed an application seeking withdrawal of the appeal on the ground that the quantum appeal has already been set aside by the Tribunal to the file of the AO with a direction to decide the issue denovo. A copy of the order of the Tribunal vide ITA no. 797.Del.2013 order dated 30th June, 2017 was also filed. In view of the above and in absence of any objection filed by the Ld. DR, the request of the assessee seeking withdrawal of the appeal is accepted. The Appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. (Order pronounced in the Open Court on 27/10/2017.
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 →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026