JAGATKUMAR & CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3881/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 September 2016AY 1995-963 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?

Following the decision in the quantum appeal, the Tribunal set aside the penalty order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order. The quantum appeal related to the same assessment year had been remitted back to the Assessing Officer by a co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be decided in line with the quantum appeal where the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer.

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, “J ” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Respondent: Ms. R.M. Madhavi
Hearing: 27.09.2016

सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing :27.09.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 27 .09.2016 आदेश / O R D E R

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM:

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Mumbai dated 09.03.2015 arising out of the penalty order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act pertaining to assessment year 1995- 96.

2.

At the time of hearing one Mr. Ramesh B. Gandhi, the Accountant of the assessee company appeared and filed a copy of the 2 ITA No.3881/M.2015

order of the Co-ordinate Bench which disposed off the quantum appeal in to 6153 & 6123/M/2011 dated 6.11.2015. He submits that in view of the order of the Co-ordinate Bench in quantum proceedings, the penalty appeal may also be decided accordingly.

3.

The Ld. Departmental Representative submits that in quantum proceedings, the Tribunal remitted the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issues as per the directions given by the Tribunal in order dated 28.4.2009.

4.

Heard both parties and perused the orders of the authorities below. We have also perused the order of the Co-ordinate Bench in quantum proceedings and find that the Co-ordinate Bench restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issues strictly as per the directions given in the order of the Tribunal dated 28.4.2009. In the circumstances, we set aside the penalty order and restore to the file of the Assessing Officer.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27th September, 2016. (N.K. PRADHAN) (C.N. PRASAD ) लेखा सद"य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य/JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated 27th September, 2016 व."न.स./ Rj , Sr. PS

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 →