ALMA ASSETS CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED. ,LUDHIANA vs. ITO,WARD-4(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1185/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 July 2024AY 2011-12Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)2 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 noted that the quantum addition, which formed the basis for the penalty, had already been deleted in a previous order. Therefore, the penalty could not stand.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the confirmation of a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was related to a quantum addition that had been made earlier.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying addition has been deleted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

order : July 22, 2024 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 04.09.2023 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee in this appeal has agitated against the confirmation of penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

3.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the order of the Tribunal dated 20.05.2024 passed in whereby, the quantum addition relating to the impugned penalty stands deleted vide aforesaid order of the Tribunal. The impugned penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, therefore, has no legs to stand and the same is accordingly ordered to be deleted.

1.

Assessment Years: 2011-12 Alma Assets Consultancy Pvt. Ltd 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.

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 →