Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh
O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2016-17 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1053337184(1) dated 31.05.2023 in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
Heard both parties at length. Case file perused.
Coming to the sole substantive ground that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in levying the impugned section 271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.3,83,160/- , it emerges during the course of hearing that the same pertains to section 40(b) partners remuneration disallowance which was allegedly claimed over and above the sum(s) specified in the corresponding partnership deed. The Revenue
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the vehement stand of the Revenue and find no merit in its arguments in light of CIT vs. M/s. Reliance Petro Products [2010] 322 ITR 158 (SC) that quantum and penalty are separate proceedings and each and every disallowance/addition in former does not ipso facto attract the latter penal provision. We delete the impugned penalty going by the very analogy. Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.