DCIT CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI vs. SAIDHAM OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the quantum appeal was remitted to the Assessing Officer, the penalty appeal also deserved to be remitted. The Assessing Officer was directed to consider the matter afresh after deciding the quantum appeal.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c). The quantum appeal, related to the additions on which the penalty was imposed, had been remitted back to the Assessing Officer by the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty appeal should be remitted to the Assessing Officer when the related quantum appeal has been remitted. The propriety of allowing additional evidence by the CIT(A) was also raised.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M.
This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, New Delhi, dated 22.10.2019 and pertains to Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds of appeal are as under:-
“1. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in allowing the submission of additional evidences by the assessee company without proper appreciating the facts and findings of AO during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred Page 1 of 3
ITA No.- 335/Del/2020 Saidham Overseas Pvt. Ltd. in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 on the additions made, of Rs. 55,31,690/- on account of inaccurate particulars of income. 3. The appellant craves to amend, modify, alter add or forego any ground of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.”
2. The issue raised in this appeal is regarding the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 55,31,690/-.
2.1 We have heard the Ld. DR. None appeared on behalf of the Assessee. The Ld. DR pointed out that the quantum appeal, in this case in for Assessment Year 2013-14 has been remitted by the ITAT vide order dated 26.04.2023 to the file of the Assessing Officer. Hence, she pointed out that this appeal should also be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer.
2.2 We have carefully considered the submission and perused the materials available on record. We find that since the quantum appeal with reference to which the penalty has been levied is remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer, then this penalty appeal also deserves to be remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer. We direct accordingly.
The Assessing Officer should consider the matter afresh after deciding the quantum appeal remitted by the ITAT.
In the result, appeal of the Revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23/06/2023
Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 23 /06/2023 (Pooja)
ITA No.- 335/Del/2020 Saidham Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI
21.06.2023 Date of dictation
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the 21.06.2023 dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member
Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS
Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT
Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk
Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026