M/S OSHO HOME APPLIANCES,BADDI vs. CIT(A), SHIMLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 528/CHANDI/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 September 2018AY 2004-052 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the penalty appeal to the file of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to decide the penalty appeal after the quantum proceedings were finalized and to give the assessee an opportunity to address any issues arising from an adverse view in the quantum proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c). The ITAT noted that the quantum additions, which formed the basis for the penalty, had been set aside by the ITAT itself to the CIT(A) for reconsideration.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty proceedings can be sustained when the underlying quantum additions have been set aside for reconsideration. The dependency of penalty proceedings on quantum additions.

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, DIVISION BENCHES ‘SMD’, CHANDIGARH

Before: MS. DIVA SINGH & Dr. B.R.R.KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar
For Respondent: Shri Yoginder Mittal,Addl. CIT
Hearing: 12.07.2018Pronounced: 04.09.2018

PER DIVA SINGH

The present appeal filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the orders 20.02.2018 of CIT(A) Shimla pertaining to 2004-05 assessment year wherein the correctness of the penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been upheld by the CIT(A) in the present proceedings is assailed on multiple grounds. 2. However, at the time of hearing, ld. AR invited attention to the quantum order passed by the ITAT in the case of the assessee for the year under consideration dated 11.05.2018 wherein the additions made by the AO in the quantum proceedings were set aside to the file of the CIT(A) in ITA 190/CHD/2018. Copy of the said order was filed. In view of these facts, his submission that since the penalty proceedings are dependant upon the additions sustained in the quantum, said issue may also be restored back to the file of the CIT(A). The said prayer of the assessee was not opposed in the peculiar facts by the ld. Sr.DR. 3. In the light of the submissions of the parties before the Bench, in the facts as have been set out herein above, we find that it is appropriate in the circumstances to restore the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the penalty appeal after the decision in the quantum proceedings is made available to the assessee. In case any adverse view has been taken

ITA 528/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2004-05 Page 2 of 2

in the quantum proceedings, the penalty proceedings be decided after giving the assessee a reasonable time to address the issues which may devolve for consideration in the penalty proceedings. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing itself.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04.09. 2018.

Sd/- Sd/-

( Dr.B.R.R.KUMAR) ( DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ‘Poonam’ Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR Asstt. Registrar ITAT,Chandigarh.

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 →