LATE JYOTI UMESH SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 20(1)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6719/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2008-093 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 basis for levying the penalty (the disallowance) no longer survived, there was no justification to continue with the penalty. Therefore, the penalty was directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty order levied under Section 271(1)(c). The penalty was based on a disallowance made in the assessment order. However, this disallowance was subsequently deleted in toto by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying disallowance, which formed the basis of the penalty, has been deleted.

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 BENCHES “G”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Amit Shukla, & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay C. Shah (AR)
For Respondent: Shri Azghar Zain (DR)
Hearing: 31/05/2016

आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla (Judicial Member): This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai- 31 {(in short ‘CIT(A)’}, dated 27.08.2014 passed against penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) dated 24.06.2011 for the Assessment Year 2008-09.

1.

Mrs. Jyoti Umesh Shetty 2 2. During the course of hearing, arguments were made by Shri Sanjay C. Shah, (AR) on behalf of the Assessee and by Shri Azghar Zain, Departmental Representative (Ld. DR) on behalf of the Revenue.

3.

During the course of hearing it was submitted by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee that disallowance made in the assessment order on which impugned penalty was levied has been deleted in toto by the Hon’ble ITAT vide its order dated 30.10.2015 in ITA No.5505/Mum/2014.

3.1. Per contra Ld. DR did not oppose the factual submissions made by the Ld. Counsel.

3.2. We have gone through the aforesaid order of the Tribunal and find that disallowance made by the AO has been deleted by the Tribunal thus, as on date the basis of levy of penalty do not survive any more, and therefore, we do not find any justification to continue with the penalty. Under these circumstances the penalty levied by the AO is directed to be deleted. 4. In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31st May , 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 →