ANGELO'S COMPUTRS LTD, MUMBAI vs. DCIT 9(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3371/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 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 since the addition for depreciation on goodwill was deleted in the quantum appeal, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not stand. Therefore, the penalty levied was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were against penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for multiple assessment years. The penalty was levied due to the disallowance of depreciation on 'goodwill'.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) could be sustained when the underlying addition in the quantum appeal was deleted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi

आदेश ORDER PER BENCH:

The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against a consolidated order dated 21.02.2013 passed by CIT(A)-20 in relation to the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2 St. Angelo’s Computers Ltd ITAs No. 3369 to 3374/Mum/2013 2006-07 and 2007-08. In all these appeals, the penalty has been levied on account of disallowance of depreciation on “goodwill”.

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 →