ITO, WAR4D-22(3), NEW DELHI vs. SARAYU OVERSEAS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2537/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 July 2021AY 2013-143 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 dismissed the Revenue's appeal. This was based on a concession by the Senior DR that the appeal was not maintainable due to CBDT Circulars regarding pecuniary limits.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the deletion of a penalty by the CIT(A). The penalty was imposed for a revised return filed after the due date, which showed a significantly higher book profit than originally declared. The original return was processed under section 143(1) at a lower figure.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal against the deletion of penalty is maintainable in light of CBDT circulars on pecuniary limits. The underlying issue was the assessee's revised return showing a higher book profit after the due date.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 115JB,Section 143(2),Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI O.P.KANT

Hearing: 12.07.2021Pronounced: 15.07.2021

ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

This appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2013-14 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-30, New Delhi dated 29.12.2017.

The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the penalty of Rs.35,04,461/ - imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 despite the fact that the return was revised after due date (i.e. 31.03.2015) on 22.12.2015 only when notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee after noticing that the assessee had in fact book profit of Rs.l,90,15,643/- u/s 115JB as against declared in the original return of income filed at Rs.15,75,135/-. "

2. "The Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in holding that the assessee had committed an inadvertent/ clerical error by showing the figure of book profit at Rs.15,75,135/- instead of the correct figure of Rs.l,90,15,643/- by ignoring the fact that the ROI was processed u/s 143(1) on 23.02.2015 at Rs.7,94,390/-. Had the assessee genuine intentions the return would have been revised before issued of the notice u/s 143(2).”

2.

At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.

3.

Ld. Sr. DR fairly conceded the facts that the appeal filed by the Revenue cannot be maintained on account of CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 & 20.08.2019 related to pecuniary limit. It is seen that the Revenue has challenged the deletion of penalty of Rs.35,04,461/-.

Therefore, in terms of above CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 & 20.08.2019, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, being not maintainable.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 15th July, 2021.

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 →