Dawesh Bishnoi, New Delhi V. ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

ITA 2299/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Dawesh Bishnoi against a penalty imposed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi, under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2012-13. The penalty was based on an addition made under section 68 of the Act. However, in a prior quantum appeal (ITA No. 314/Del/2022), the Tribunal had deleted this addition, which formed the basis of the penalty. Both the assessee's counsel and the Departmental Representative agreed that the penalty could not stand following the deletion of the addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 116259 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2022
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No. 314/Del/2022
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANSHI JAIN
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2299/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dawesh Bishnoi, C/o Vinod Kumar Mittal, D-27, Jangpura Extention, New Delhi. PAN: AEHPB2402C Versus Income-tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Manshi Jain, C.A. Revenue by : Sh. Hemant Gupta, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 13.06.2023 Date of pronouncement : 13.06.2023 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.: This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 29.07.2022 of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (appeals)-42, Delhi confirming the penalty imposed of Rs.5,22,600/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. At the time of hearing, learned counsel, at the very outset, submitted that the addition, based on which, the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was imposed, has been deleted by the Tribunal, while ITA No. 2299/Del/2022 2 deciding the quantum appeal of the assessee. Thus, she submitted, the penalty imposed cannot survive. 3. Learned Departmental Representative fairly agreed with the aforesaid submission of the assessee. 4. Having considered rival submissions and perused the materials on record, we find that the penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is based on addition of an amount of Rs.17,52,930/- u/s. 68 of the Act. However, while deciding the quantum appeal of the assessee contesting the aforesaid addition, the Tribunal in order dated 29.09.2022 in ITA No. 314/Del/2022 has deleted the addition. Thus, the foundation, on which the Assessing Officer has imposed penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, is no more in existence. That being the factual position, penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot survive. Hence, we delete the penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. In the result, appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13/06/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated:13.06.2023. *aks/-