LONGULF TRADING (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6431/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 October 2016AY 2002-032 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 addition on which the penalty was levied had been deleted by a previous Tribunal order, the penalty order no longer survived. Therefore, the penalty was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was based on an addition made by the Assessing Officer for freight charges to an Iraqi authority, citing the Volcker Committee Report.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parikh, AR
For Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran, DR

O R D E R

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the CIT-(A)-41, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-17/IT-21/2011-12 dated 23-08-2013. Assessment was framed by the DCIT, Circle- 2(2), Mumbai for the assessment year 2002-03 vide his order dated 28-03-2005 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). Penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act was levied by the DCIT- 8(2), Mumbai vide his order dated 25-03-2011.

2.

The only issue in this appeal of the assessee is against the order of the CIT (A) confirming levy of penalty u/s 271 (1) of the Act.

3.

At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the quantum appeal on which penalty was levied was challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal in and the Tribunal vide order dated 02-03-2016 has allowed the appeal by deleting the disputed addition on which penalty was levied. In view of this, he requested that penalty levied on the assessee be deleted.

4. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. On perusal of records, we find that the quantum addition has been made by the AO on account of freight paid (inland waterways

Rs. 6,67,802/- to Iraq Inland Waterways Authority on the basis of allegation in the Volckar Committee Report. This addition has been deleted by the Tribunal in order dated 02-03-2016 on this issue. We also find that the penalty under section 271 (1) (c) of the Act was levied on this issue by the AO. Hence, the orders of the authorities below levying penalty on the assessee do not survive. In view of this, we delete the penalty and allow the appeal of the assessee.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20-10-2016.

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 →