ALEMBIC SECURITIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 46, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1081/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 May 2017AY 2010-112 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 quantum appeal was set aside and restored to the AO, the penalty order also needed to be set aside. The matter was restored to the AO to decide the issue afresh after the quantum appeal is decided.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order under Section 271AAA for the Assessment Year 2010-2011. The quantum appeal for the same assessment year had been restored back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for re-determination.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271AAA can be sustained when the underlying quantum addition has been set aside and restored to the AO for re-determination.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Chokshi
For Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR
Hearing: 01.05.2017Pronounced: 01.05.2017

PER R.C. SHARMA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT (A) for the Assessment Year 2010-2011, in the matter of penalty u/s 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to the order of the Tribunal in quantum appeal in assessee’s own case vide order dated 30.9.2016 , wherein quantum addition has been restored back to the file of the AO to re-determine the total income as per the directions given in the said order.

3.

We have carefully gone through the order of the Tribunal in quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos. 243 to 245/M/2013 for the AYs 2006-07, 2010-11 and 2009-10, wherein the Tribunal, after discussing the issue in detail, restored the matter back to the file of the AO to re-determine the total income as per the directions given in paras 3 to 9.2 of its order. Considering the same, we are of the opinion, since the quantum appeal itself has been set aside, the penalty order is also required to be set aside and matter is restored back

to the file of the AO deciding the issue afresh after deciding the quantum appal. We direct accordingly.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 01st May, 2017. (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक 01.05.2017 व.नन.स./ OKK , Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A)- 4. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR,

5.

ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्ड पाईर / Guard file. सत्मावऩत प्रनत ////

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

More judgments on Section 271AAA

All 606 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →