ACIT, CIRCLE-13(1), NEW DELHI vs. KRBL LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1680/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 March 2023AY 2015-165 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum additions, which formed the basis for the penalty, were deleted by the first appellate authority and upheld by the Tribunal, the deletion of the penalty was justified. Therefore, there was no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the deletion of penalties levied under Section 271(1)(c)/271AAB. The penalties were based on additions made for differences in sale/purchase, commission received, and unexplained cash/stock.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c)/271AAB can be sustained when the underlying quantum additions have been deleted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 271AAB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv, Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv, Shri Arpit Goyal, CA
For Respondent: Shri Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT- DR
Hearing: 29.03.2023Pronounced: 29.03.2023

Heard together (6 matters)

ITA No. 1676/DEL/2022
ITA No. 1677/DEL/2022
ITA No. 1678/DEL/2022
ITA No. 1679/DEL/2022
ITA No. 1680/DEL/2022
ITA No. 1681/DEL/2022

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

1.

The above captioned six separate appeals by the Revenue are preferred against the common order of the ld. CIT(A) - 27, New Delhi dated 21.05.2022 pertaining to Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12, 2013-14 to 2016-17.

2.

Since common grievance is involved in all these appeals, they are decided by us by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

The common grievance in the captioned appeals relates to the deletion of penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)/271AAB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short].

4.

The common basis for the levy of impugned penalty are:

(i) Addition made on account of difference in sale and purchase and commission paid for arranging bogus sales/purchase entries;

(ii) Addition made on account of commission received from DMCC, Dubai; and (iii) Addition on account of unexplained cash and unaccounted stock.

5.

We find that in the quantum addition, the appeals of the assessee were partly allowed by the first appellate authority against whose order both the assessee and the revenue approached this Tribunal, and the Tribunal in to 1202/DEL/2020 in assessee’s appeals and ITA Nos. 1338 to 1344/DEL/2020 in Revenue’s appeals has deleted the quantum addition and allowed the assessee’s appeals and dismissed the Revenue’s appeals.

6.

Since the quantum addition stands deleted, the ld. CIT(A) rightly deleted the impugned penalty. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A).

7.

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos.

1676 to 16818 are dismissed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 29.03.2023.

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 →