NETMAGIC IT SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(2)(3), MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal deleted the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c). This decision was based on a previous order of a coordinate bench that had deleted a similar penalty for an earlier assessment year when the quantum appeal regarding Section 10A deduction was decided in favor of the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2009-10, which was based on a disallowance of deduction under Section 10A. A coordinate bench of the tribunal had previously restored the Section 10A disallowance to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying disallowance leading to the penalty has been restored for reconsideration and similar penalties have been deleted in prior years based on favorable quantum appeals.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR
आदेश / O R D E R PER C.N.PRASAD (JM) This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-21, Mumbai dated 14.5.2015 for the assessment year 2009-10 in sustaining the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the disallowance of claim for deduction u/s 10A of the Act.
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal by order dated 26.4.2017 in restored the disallowance of deduction u/s 10A to the file of the Assessing Officer and to pass orders as per the directions contained in the Coordinate Bench order for the assessment year 2007-08 in (A.Y.2009-10) M/s Netmagic IT Services Pvt. Ltd. dated 6.4.2016. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee further submits that on similar circumstances for the assessment year 2007- 08, the Coordinate Bench in ITA No.3157/Mum/2013 dated 3.10.2016 deleted the penalty levied u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act.
The Ld.DR fairly submitted that the issue in appeal in quantum proceedings is in favour of the Assessee as the Coordinate Bench directed the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s 10A of the Act.
We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the decision of the Coordinate Bench. The disallowance made in the assessment order u/s10A has been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to follow the order of the Tribunal for the assessment year 2007-08. For the assessment year 2007- 08, the Coordinate Bench directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction subject to Assessee satisfying other conditions prescribed u/s10A of the Act. Coming to the penalty u/s 271(1)(c), for the assessment year 2007-08, the Coordinate Bench deleted the penalty observing as under : “2. At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee briefly narrated the facts and submitted that in the assessment made u/s 143(3) of the Act, AO disallowed the claim of deduction of Rs. 1,42,03,012/- u/s 10A of the Act. Aggrieved assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority and the CIT (A) confirmed the rejection of exemption. Matter travelled to the Tribunal and in the first round of the proceedings before the ITAT, the Tribunal allowed the appeal vide (AY 2007-2008), dated 6.4.2016. Before us, it is the submission of the Ld Counsel for the assessee that since, the Tribunal allowed the quantum appeal, penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is required to be deleted. 3. After hearing the Ld Representatives of both the parties and on perusal of the cited order of the Tribunal (supra), we find, vide para 10 of the said order, Tribunal directed the AO to allow the deduction u/s 10A and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Considering the (A.Y.2009-10) M/s Netmagic IT Services Pvt. Ltd. same we are of the considered opinion, since the Tribunal allowed the quantum appeal, penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) has no legs to stand. Accordingly, we delete the penalty. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.”
Keeping in view the above orders, we delete the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment year 2009-10 also.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on the 17th day of May 2017.
More judgments on Section 10A
- Ahaguru Education Technology Private… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1993/CHNY/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- M/S. Aradhyaa Infra & Holdings Pvt. Ltd… vs ITO, Corp. Ward-1(1), ChennaiITA 1793/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs DCIT Cir 2(3), MumbaiITA 7487/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: Disposed24 Aug 2026AY 2008-09
- D.C.I.T. Circle 3(3), Mumbai vs Rbs Business Services P. Ltd., MumbaiITA 4467/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: Disposed14 Aug 2026AY 2007-08
- Rbs Business Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs DCIT Cir 3(3), MumbaiITA 4306/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: Disposed14 Aug 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026