INCOME TAX OFFICER, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJESHRI AVAS DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 758/AHD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 February 2024AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), Ms. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the addition on which the penalty was based was deleted by the Tribunal in a separate appeal, the penalty lost its force. Therefore, the deletion of the penalty by the CIT(A) was upheld.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, levied on the assessee for bogus purchases. The penalty was based on an addition made to the assessee's income.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty levied on additions that are subsequently deleted by the appellate authority is sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R

सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of 07/02/2024 Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of 27/02/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:

1.

The instant appeal filed at the behest of the Revenue is directed against the order dated 21.07.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the penalty order dated 27.03.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), (ITO vs. Rajeshri Avas Developers Private Limited) A.Y.– 2013-14 - 2 - Ahmedabad under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

The matter relates to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of bogus purchase. The assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was finalized on 26.03.2016 assessing total income at Rs.3,97,36,810/- on account of bogus purchases which was further confirmed by the First Appellate Authority. Parallelly, the penalty proceeding under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act initiated against the assessee was finalized upon levying penalty of Rs.1,26,26,237/-, which was further confirmed by the First Appellate Authority.

3.

On the other hand, the quantum appeal preferred by the assessee before the Tribunal was allowed upon deletion of addition made in the assessment order dated 26.03.2016 by passing the order in dated 06.08.2021. In that view of the matter, in our considered opinion, since the addition has been deleted by the Ld. Tribunal, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act imposed on the basis of such addition has lost (ITO vs. Rajeshri Avas Developers Private Limited) A.Y.– 2013-14 - 3 - its force and, therefore, rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, decline to interfere with the said order. The Revenue’s appeal is, therefore, found to be devoid of any merit and thus dismissed.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

This Order pronounced on 27/02/2024 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 27/02/2024 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

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 →