SH. GURJEET SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4879/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 February 2016AY 2004-052 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 if the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3)/147 were quashed, the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) would not survive. Therefore, the penalty order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty order upheld by the CIT(A). The penalty was imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee argued that the original assessment, which formed the basis for the penalty, was quashed by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the original assessment proceedings are quashed. The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-I’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH

For Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr.DR
Hearing: 10.02.2016Pronounced: 25.02.2016

ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 12.01.2015 of CIT(A)-15, Delhi pertaining to 2004-05 AY wherein the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) by the AO has been upheld. The Ld. AR placed on record copy of the order dated 18.12.2015 in and relying thereon submitted that the ITAT has quashed the assessment re- opened by the AO u/s 147 holding it to be without application of mind and also without any service. Accordingly it was his submission that since the additions made do not stand in the eyes of law, the penalty order confirmed in appeal deserves to be quashed. In support of the said prayer, attention was invited to page 10 para 11 of the order of the ITAT in the quantum proceedings:-

11.

“In view of the above discussion, facts and circumstances of the case as well as decisions cited above, the reopening in the case of the assessee is without any application of mind and further there is no service of notice issued 148. Therefore, the reopening is not sustainable and consequently the same is quashed.”

I.T.A .No.-4879/Del/2015 2. Considering the order of the ITAT in the quantum proceedings, the Ld. AR had nothing further to state as the additions admittedly stood deleted as the assessment itself was quashed.

3.

Having heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record, I am of the view that where the proceedings u/s 143(3)/147 have been quashed by the Co-ordinate Bench the occasion to consider the merits of penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) upheld by the CIT(A) on the additions made to the income of the assessee at Rs.5,25,000/- does not arise. Accordingly in the absence of any argument to the contrary, it is held that the penalty proceedings do not survive.

The impugned order is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 25th of February, 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 →