MRS. ALKA GOEL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3371/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 September 2017AY 1999-20003 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 since the assessment order forming the basis of the penalty was set aside, the penalty itself could not stand. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was based on an assessment order that was subsequently set aside by the ITAT for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying assessment order has been set aside. The validity of the penalty in light of the set-aside assessment order.

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: Sh. N. K. Saini

Hearing: 18.09.2017Pronounced: 25.09.2017

ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 29.09.2016 of ld. CIT(A)-10, New Delhi.

2.

The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the confirmation of penalty of Rs.7,47,989/- levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3.

During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the very outset stated that the assessment order on the basis of which the impugned penalty was levied has been set aside to the AO for fresh adjudication in for the assessment year 1999- 2000 by the ITAT Delhi Bench ‘SMC’, New Delhi vide order dated ITA No. 3371/Del/2017 2 Alka Goel 30.06.2017, as such the addition on the basis of which penalty was levied is not inexistence.

4.

In his rival submissions the ld. DR although supported the orders of the authorities below but could not controvert the aforesaid contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee.

5.

After considering the submissions of both the parties and the material available on the record, it is noticed that the assessment order passed by the AO on the basis of which the impugned penalty was levied has been set aside to the file of the AO vide order dated 30.06.2017 in ITA No. 3065/Del/2014. The relevant findings have been given in para 7 of the said order which read as under: “7. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the assessee had produced the additional evidences first time before the ITAT which were not before the AO or the ld. CIT(A). In my opinion, these documents furnished first time, are relevant to decide the present controversy. However, the authorities below did not have the occasion to deal with those documents furnished first time by the assessee. I, therefore, considering the totality of the facts, deem it appropriate to set aside this issue back to the file of the AO to be decided afresh in accordance with law after considering the documents furnished by the assessee first time before the Tribunal and also the contention raised in the additional grounds. The AO shall provide a due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 3 Alka Goel 6. Since, the assessment order for the year under consideration has been set aside to the file of the AO and the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is co-related, therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the AO to be adjudicated afresh after considering the outcome of the assessment order directed to be passed afresh vide aforesaid referred to order dated 30.06.2017.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 25/09/2017)

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 →