DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. JASPAL SINGH SAHNEY AS EXECUTOR OF LATE MR. DEVENDRA SINGH SAHNEY, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5748/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 December 2024Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)1 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 noted that a Co-ordinate Bench had already deleted the addition made by the AO in quantum assessment proceedings. Therefore, the penalty levied on that addition could not survive. The Tribunal confirmed the decision of the Ld. CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an order by the Ld. CIT(A) which deleted a penalty of Rs. 2.90 crores levied by the AO for AY 2006-07. The AO had reopened the assessment and made an addition based on information about foreign bank accounts, and subsequently levied a penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty order survives when the addition on which it was based has been deleted by a coordinate bench of the Tribunal.

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, MUMBAI “F” BENCH : MUMBAI

Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

Assessment Year : 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner of Income Jaspal Singh Sahney Tax, As Executor of Room No. 627, 6th Floor, vs. Late Mr. Devendra Singh Sahney, Kautilya Bhavan, BKC, 50, Usha Kiran, 25th Floor, Mumbai Carmichael, Grant Road, Mumbai PAN : AAIPS9975N (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ashwin Damania For Revenue : Shri Paresh Deshpande Date of Hearing : 17-12-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 18-12-2024 ORDER PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M :

The Revenue has filed this appeal against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[„Ld.CIT(A)‟], deleting the penalty of Rs. 2.90 crores levied by the AO for the assessment year (AY.) 2006-07.

2.

The Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that that the AO got information that the assessee is having accounts in a foreign country with HSBC Bank, a Swiss Bank. Accordingly, he reopened the assessment and made the addition of deposits. The AO, thereafter, levied penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on the addition so made. The Ld.AR submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has since deleted this addition vide its order dt.02-04-2024 passed in (AY. 2006- 07). Accordingly, he submitted that the impugned penalty order will not survive, since the additions stand deleted. Accordingly, he submitted that the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) does not call for any interference. In this regard, the Ld.AR also furnished a copy of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal on quantum assessment proceedings, referred supra.

3.

We heard the Ld.DR and perused the record. We notice that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has allowed the appeal by deleting the addition made by the AO. Hence, the impugned penalty order will not survive, since the addition on which the penalty was levied stood deleted. Accordingly, we confirm the decision rendered by the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

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 →