Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a penalty order under Section 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 can be validly passed while the assessment/quantum order (Section 147 assessment upheld by CIT(A)) is under challenge before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), and whether the impugned penalty order dated 9th December 2025 should be quashed.
Analysis: The Court examined prior decisions of this Court establishing that penalty proceedings should be kept in abeyance while the challenge to the underlying assessment/quantum is pending before the appellate forum. The petitioner had filed an appeal before the ITAT against the assessment order for A.Y. 2016-2017 and had informed the department during penalty proceedings; notwithstanding this, the penalty order under Section 271D was passed on 9th December 2025. The respondents have not demonstrated that the assessment appeal was considered and decided against the petitioner before passing the penalty, and no satisfactory explanation was provided for non-consideration of the petitioner's submission placed on record during penalty proceedings. In view of the binding precedents and the factual position that the quantum challenge was pending, the Court held that continuation of penalty proceedings at that stage was impermissible and the appropriate course was to keep penalty proceedings in abeyance until the ITAT decides the appeal.
Conclusion: The impugned penalty order dated 9th December 2025 is quashed and set aside. Penalty proceedings are to be kept in abeyance until the ITAT disposes of the appeal against the assessment order; only if the ITAT's decision is favourable to the Revenue may the Revenue resume and conclude penalty proceedings. The writ petition succeeds in favour of the petitioner (assessee).