DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, PUNE, PMT BUILDING SWARGATE, PUNE vs. VISHNU PUNDLIK PASHANKAR, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 873/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 February 2024AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the addition of long-term capital gains, on which the penalty was based, had already been deleted in the assessee's earlier appeal, the penalty had no basis to stand. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against a penalty order under Section 271 of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was levied on an addition of long-term capital gains made by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) could be sustained when the underlying addition to income was deleted. The appeal also concerned the revival of the penalty.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE : [VIRTUAL HEARING]

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH,

Hearing: 09.02.2024Pronounced: 28.02.2024

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.873/PUN./2023 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year 2015-2016 Vishnu Pundlik Pashankar, D102, Windsor Residency, The DCIT, Circle-2, C/o. Mahesh Pashankar PMT Bldg., Shankar Baner, Baner Balewadi Phata vs. Sheth Road, Swargate, Opp. Ganesh Datta Mandir, Pune – 411 037 Pune – 411 045 Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN AAQPP9498R (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Rohit Shah For Revenue : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 09.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2015- 2016, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1053624494(1), dated 08.06.2023, involving proceedings u/s.271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that there is hardly any need for 2 I.T.A.No.873/PUN./2023 us to delve with the relevant factual matrix at length so far as the Revenue’s sole substantive grievance herein seeking to revive sec.271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.1,43,16,869/- is concerned. This is for the precise reason that the same pertains to corresponding quantum of long term capital gains addition of Rs.6,31,81,249/- made by the Assessing Officer in his sec.143(3) assessment dated 28.12.2017 which already stands deleted in assessee’s appeal ITA.No.428/PUN./2019 decided on 07.07.2021. That being the case and in absence of any change in this clinching factual factual backdrop, we are of the considered view that the impugned penalty hardly has any legs to stand. The Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance seeking to revive the same is rejected in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

All other issues on merits raised in the Revenue’s instant appeal stand rendered academic.

3.

This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.02.2024.

More judgments on Section 271

All 211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →