SMT. TARA DEVI AGRAWAL,BHOPAL vs. THE NFAC CENTRE,DELHI, BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 115/IND/2023Status: HeardITAT Indore20 September 2023AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal deleted the penalty. It was found that the returned income was filed within the due date, and the addition confirmed by the CIT(A) was subsequently deleted by the ITAT in a separate appeal.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) imposed a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the assessee for AY 2013-14. The penalty was based on treating returned income as concealed income and an addition confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is sustainable when the returned income was filed on time and the addition forming the basis of the penalty was subsequently deleted by the higher tribunal.

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, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.09.2023Pronounced: 20.09.2023

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

1.

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 02.02.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of penalty-order dated 15.03.2022 passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] concerning assessment year 2013-14, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Tara Devi Agarwal, Bhopal v. NFAC, Delhi AY 2013-14 2. Ld. AR for assessee carried us to Para No. 4 of the aforesaid penalty- order dated 15.03.2022 and demonstrated that the AO has imposed penalty of Rs. 1,60,143/- treating the income of Rs. 10,84,926/- as concealed income. The components of the income of Rs. 10,84,926/- are (i) returned income of Rs. 4,41,000/-, and (ii) addition of Rs. 6,43,926/- confirmed by CIT(A) out of the addition made by AO.

3.

Then, Ld. AR submitted that, vide Para No. 2 / Page No. 3 of penalty- order, Ld. AO has treated the returned-income of Rs. 4,41,000/- as concealed income on the premise that the assessee failed to file return u/s 139(1) which is factually wrong. Ld. AR filed a copy of the return duly acknowledged as No. 059150713018632 by ITO-3(1), Bhopal which shows the returned-income of Rs. 4,41,000/- filed u/s 139(1) on 15.07.2013.

Regarding second basis of penalty i.e. the addition of Rs. 6,43,926/- confirmed by CIT(A), Ld. AR submitted that the assessee went in next appeal to ITAT, Indore Bench whereupon, through a consolidated order in IT(SS)A No. 1 to 4/Ind/2020 for AY 2010-11 to 2014-15 dated 11.01.2023, the ITAT has fully deleted the addition. Thus, Ld. AR submitted, entire penalty imposed by AO has no legs to stand and hence un-sustainable. Therefore, the impugned penalty deserves to be deleted fully. Ld. DR for revenue fairly agreed to the submission of Ld. AR.

Tara Devi Agarwal, Bhopal v. NFAC, Delhi AY 2013-14

4.

In view of congruence by parties, we hereby delete the penalty. The assessee succeeds in this appeal.

5.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.09.2023.

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 →