M/S. SHAILEE DEVELOPERS,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), 504., BARODA

ITA 996/AHD/2016Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 September 2017AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that in quantum proceedings, a Co-ordinate Bench had decided the matter in favor of the assessee and deleted the additions. Consequently, the penalty levied was also deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income declaring Rs. 59,860. The assessment was completed at Rs. 6,59,860 after additions of Rs. 6,00,000 on account of unaccounted receipts. Penalty proceedings were initiated, and the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following the deletion of additions in quantum proceedings.

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, “ SMC ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD

For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 28/09/2017

PER SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Vadodara, dated 04/02/2016 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09, on the following grounds:

i. The CIT(A) has erred both in law and in fact in con

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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 →