RUCHI TANTIA,FARIDABAD V. ITO WARD 2(1), FARIDABAD

ITA 3704/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around the penalty imposed on Ruchi Tantia under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following additions made during the assessment proceedings under sections 153A r/w s 143(3). The Assessing Officer had imposed a penalty of Rs. 9,01,870, which was upheld by the CIT(A). However, the Tribunal found that the foundational assessment, which led to the penalty, was flawed as per a co-ordinate bench's decision in a similar case involving the same appellant. The Tribunal applied the principle of 'Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus', meaning that if the foundation is removed, the superstructure (in this case, the penalty) must also fall.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312712 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No. 5956/DEL/2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMER SINGH MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: UJJAWAL CHAUDHARY
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 271(1)(c); 153A; 69C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3704/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2015-16] Ruchi Tantia Vs. The I.T.O House No. 454, Sector 14, Ward 2(1) Faridabad Faridabad PAN: AAFPT 7201 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ujjawal Chaudhary, CA Department By : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT- DR Date of Hearing : 29.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, AM :- This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-29, New Delhi dated 28.06.2024 for A.Y 2015-16. 2 ITA No. 3704/DEL/2024 Ruchi Tantia [A.Y 2015-16] 2. Facts, in brief, are that penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] were initiated by the Assessing Officer on the basis of additions made in original assessment proceedings u/s 153A rws 143(3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer passed an order imposing a penalty amounting to Rs. 9,01,870/- which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 3. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted written submissions and contended that the ITAT, New Delhi Bench-B in ITA No. 5956/DEL/2018 in A.Y 2015-16 vide order dated 07/03/2025 has passed an order deciding the case in favor of the assessee. The ld. counsel for the assessee further submitted that this is a clear indication of the fact that the assessment proceedings completed u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Act were itself having certain flaws in completion. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) were imposed in A.Y 2015-16 on the basis of assessment proceedings under section 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Act. Thus, if the base for initiating the proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the 3 ITA No. 3704/DEL/2024 Ruchi Tantia [A.Y 2015-16] Act is fractured, such penalty proceedings and order passed by CIT(A) cannot stand. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that a penalty of Rs. 9,01,870/-was imposed on the assessee by the then Assessing Officer vide order dated 23/06/2021 on the basis of additions made in the original assessment proceedings u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Act amounting to Rs. 29,18,674/-. 7. We find that the co-ordinate bench in the case of Ruchi Tantia and others ITA No.5956/DEL/2018 for A.Y 2015-16 vide order dated 07.03.2025 decided the case in favor the assessee and the disallowance u/s 10(38) and additions made u/s 69C of the Act were deleted by the Tribunal. The relevant portion of the Tribunal order reads as under: “In the instant case no incriminating material was found from the assessee during the search and seizure proceedings and the material 4 ITA No. 3704/DEL/2024 Ruchi Tantia [A.Y 2015-16] in form of statement of third person Shri Pradeep Kumar was relied based on some other search operation. Hence if at all such statement is sought to be relied upon against the assessee, then logically the Assessing Officer should have proceeded on the assessee under section 153 C of the Act and not under section 153A of the Act. Hence the addition made in assessee hands under section 153 A of the Act is deleted. 14. We have decided the legal issue raised by assessee in his favour of the assessee, hence rest grounds are not adjudicated at this stage and be keep them open. 15. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 8. We have given thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee. We find that the Tribunal in ITA No. 5956/DEL/2018 and others have deleted the additions/disallowances made in the assessment. We, therefore, follow the legal dictum Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus, meaning thereby, that in case the foundation is removed, the super structure falls. Since the quantum addition has been deleted and the foundation has been removed, the super structure i.e. penalty must fall. We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to 5 ITA No. 3704/DEL/2024 Ruchi Tantia [A.Y 2015-16] delete the penalty. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are hereby allowed. 9. In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No. 3704/DEL/2024 is allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 29.04.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 29th APRIL, 2025. VL/ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) Asst. Registrar, 5. DR ITAT, New Delhi 6 ITA No. 3704/DEL/2024 Ruchi Tantia [A.Y 2015-16] Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order 2. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictation Member 3. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 7. Date on which the final Tribunal Order is uploaded by the Sr. P.S./P.S. on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk alongwith Tribunal Order 9. Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judiSIS portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. The date on which the file goes for xerox 12. The date on which the file goes for endorsement 13. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 14. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the Tribunal order 15. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section 16. Date of Dispatch of the Order "