SURENDER KUMAR YADAV,MAHENDERGARH vs. ITO, NARNAUL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3274/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 January 2017AY 2007-082 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty cannot survive when the quantum assessment has been set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty levied on the assessee under Section 271(1)(c). The quantum assessment itself had been restored to the Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication by a previous Tribunal order.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying quantum assessment has been set aside and restored for fresh adjudication.

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 ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Before: BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY & SMT. BEENA A PILLAI

For Appellant: Ms. Varsha Bhattacharya, Adv

PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 29.01.2013 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-XX, New Delhi for assessment year (A.Y.) 2002-03, wherein the first appellate authority had deleted the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) on the assessee u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

2.

After hearing rival contentions we find that the Delhi “I” Bench of the Tribunal in for Assessment Year 2002-03 and C.O.No.77/Del/2010 and ITA 178/Del/2010 for Assessment Year 2002-03 had resorted the entire matter to the file of the A.O. for denovo adjudication vide order dt. 31st October, 2014.

3.

In view of the above we see no reason to interfere in this order of the Ld.CIT(A) for the reason that the penalty in question cannot survive, when 1 the quantum assessment itself has been restored to the A.O. by the Tribunal. Hence we dismiss this appeal by the Revenue for reasons other than those given by the Ld.CIT(A) in the impugned order.

4.

In the result Revenue’s appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25th January, 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 →