TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal upholds CIT(A)'s decision to delete penalties under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>M/s. Maitrik Buildcon P. Ltd., M/s. Madhuj Reality P. Ltd., M/s. Martand Estate P. Ltd., M/s. Medhbhuti Complex P. Ltd. Versus ITO, Ward- 2 (1) (4) Ahmedabad.</h3> M/s. Maitrik Buildcon P. Ltd., M/s. Madhuj Reality P. Ltd., M/s. Martand Estate P. Ltd., M/s. Medhbhuti Complex P. Ltd. Versus ITO, Ward- 2 (1) (4) ... Issues:Appeals by Revenue against deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act by CIT(A).Analysis:The judgment involves four appeals by the Revenue against separate orders of the ld.CIT(A)-4, Ahmedabad, all disposed of by a single order due to a common issue. The Revenue's grievance was the deletion of penalties imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The facts and orders in all cases were identical, with variations in penalty amounts. The Tribunal considered the case of one assessee for convenience. The penalty was deleted by the CIT(A) based on the deletion of additions made by the AO, a fact uncontested by the Revenue.The Tribunal noted that an addition to the total income of the assessee was made by the AO, which was later deleted by the Tribunal. The ld.CIT(A) reproduced the Tribunal's finding, emphasizing the lack of evidence to support the addition. The Tribunal highlighted that penalty under section 271(1)(c) is dependent on the additions made to the income of the assessee. Since the additions were deleted, the penalty had no basis. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to cancel the penalty, applying the same reasoning to all four cases. The appeals by the Revenue were dismissed.Regarding the Cross objections filed by the assessees, the Tribunal found no merit as the grievances were not against any part of the CIT(A)'s order. The Tribunal clarified that for a CO to be maintainable, the cross-objector must demonstrate grievances against a specific part of the impugned order. Since the COs did not meet this requirement, they were deemed not maintainable. Consequently, all appeals by the Revenue and COs by the assessees were dismissed.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalties imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) for all four assessees. The judgment emphasized the importance of evidence and the basis for quantifying penalties under the Income Tax Act. The dismissal of both the Revenue's appeals and the assessees' COs concluded the matter.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
