ASST CIT CEN CIR 8(4), MUMBAI vs. OLEANDER FARMS P.LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5246/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 September 2016AY 2008-093 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 affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty. It was a common ground that the circumstances justifying the deletion of the penalty remained valid.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer levied a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) based on additions made to the assessee's income. The CIT(A) deleted this penalty because the underlying additions had been deleted by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the additions forming the basis of the penalty have been deleted by a higher appellate authority.

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, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri A.Ramachandran
For Respondent: Shri J.P. Bairagra
Hearing: 20/09/2016Pronounced: 21/09/2016

ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M:

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2008-09 is directed against an order passed by CIT(A)- 47 Mumbai dated 20/08/2015 which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 29/09/2014.

2.

In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following Grounds of appeal:-

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld CIT(A) erred in cancelling the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT deleting the quantum addition without appreciating the fact the decision of the ITAT in deleting the quantum addition has not been accepted and penalty under section 260A is being filed.

The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.”

2. The issue raised in this appeal arises from penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.38,79,800/-. The CIT(A) has deleted the penalty for the reason that the additions made in the assessment order, on the basis of which penalty was levied, had since been deleted by the Tribunal vide order in to 2249/Mum/2013 dated 17/07/2015. Against such a decision of the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us.

3.

At the time of hearing, it was a common ground between the parties that the circumstances noted by the CIT(A) continue to hold the field and, therefore, there is no justification to interfere with the ultimate conclusion of the CIT(A), which is hereby affirmed.

4.

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

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 →