Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

Ms. Neeta Gupta, 75/5571, Ragher Pura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi Vs. ITO, Ward-33(4), New Delhi
December, 09th 2015
                DELHI BENCH `F', NEW DELHI
         Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena Pillai, JM
             ITA No. 3479/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03
Ms. Neeta Gupta,                  Vs ITO,
75/5571, Ragher Pura, Karol Bagh,    Ward-33(4),
New Delhi                            New Delhi
(APPELLANT)                          (RESPONDENT)
                 Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Yadav, Adv.
                 Revenue by :

Date of Hearing : 03.12.2015      Date of Pronouncement : 08.12.2015

Per N. K. Saini, AM:

     This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated
24.03.2015 of ld. CIT-XVII, New Delhi.

2.   The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates
to the confirmation of penalty of Rs. 4,22,770/- levied by the
AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act). During the course of hearing the ld.
Counsel for the assessee at the very outset stated that the
penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was levied in this case on the
basis of the additions made by the AO while framing the
assessment vide order dated 20.12.2007, which was confirmed
by the ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 31.10.2012. Thereafter, the
                                     2                    ITA No. 3479/Del/2015
                                                               Neeta Gupta

AO issued the notice dated 26.12.2012 to the assessee to show
cause as to why the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act may not
be levied. The AO did not accept the submission of the
assessee that the issue may be kept in abeyance till the
disposal of appeal of the ITAT and levied the penalty u/s
271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs. 4,22,770/-. The said
penalty was sustained by the ld. CIT(A), however, on the
appeal of the assessee on quantum addition in ITA No.
239/Del/2013, the ITAT Delhi Bench, SMC-1, New Delhi vide
order dated 30.11.2015 held that the reopening was bad in law
and accordingly the assessment order dated 20.12.2007 was set
aside and as such there is no addition survives on the basis of
which the impugned penalty was levied.

3.   In his rival submissions the ld. DR supported the order of the
authorities below.

4.   We have considered the submissions of both the parties and
perused the material available on record. In the present case, it is noticed
that the assessment order dated 20.12.2007 which is the basis for levying
the impugned penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been held as bad in
law vide order dated 30.11.2015 in ITA No. 239/Del/2013 by the ITAT
Delhi Bench, SMC-1, New Delhi. Therefore, the impugned penalty does
not survive. In that view of the matter the impugned order is set aside
                                        3                    ITA No. 3479/Del/2015
                                                                  Neeta Gupta

and the penalty amounting to Rs. 4,22,770/- levied by the AO and
sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is deleted.

5.       In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
 (Order Pronounced in the Court on 08/12/2015)

       Sd/-                                            Sd/-
   (Beena Pillai)                                   (N. K. Saini)
JUDICIAL MEMBER                                ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 08/12/2015
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
                                                      ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2023 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting