2018 (1) TMI 1037 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition u/s 69C - Held that - In the light of the records placed before us and the orders submitted by Ld.AR in assessee s case for the year under consideration by this Tribunal as well as by Hon ble High Court in quantum appeal. 2014 (4) TMI 536 - DELHI HIGH COURT Since the addition no longer sustains, penalty appeal cannot survive. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues Involved:
Penalty appeal against deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of ?38,85,616/- for concealed income of ?1,29,52,053/-.

Detailed Analysis:
1. Background: The appellant, a real estate development company, faced penalty proceedings after an assessment under section 153A read with 143(3) of the Act resulted in an addition of ?1,29,52,053 under section 69C. The assessing officer imposed a penalty of ?38,85,616, which was challenged by the appellant before the Ld. CIT(A).

2. Ld. CIT(A) Decision: The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty by reasoning that since the quantum addition was deleted by Hon'ble ITAT, the concealment penalty levied by the assessing officer could not be sustained. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the concealed income represented the addition confirmed by the First Appellate Authority, which was subsequently reversed by the ITAT, leading to the deletion of the penalty.

3. Judicial Review: The Tribunal, in a consolidated order, had earlier deleted the addition made by the assessing officer under section 69C. The Tribunal noted that the revenue failed to provide corroborative evidence or supporting material to justify the addition. The Tribunal also dismissed the revenue's claim of violating Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, stating that no new evidence was introduced before the Ld. CIT(A).

4. High Court Decision: The revenue further appealed to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, which upheld the Tribunal's decision. The High Court emphasized the necessity of foundational facts to support presumptions drawn by the revenue. It concluded that the findings of the AO and CIT were conjectural and not based on material evidence, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

5. Final Decision: Considering the finality of the decision in the quantum appeal and the lack of sustenance of the addition, the Tribunal dismissed the penalty appeal filed by the revenue. The Tribunal held that since the addition no longer stood, the penalty appeal could not survive, thereby upholding the deletion of the penalty by the Ld. CIT(A).

In conclusion, the penalty appeal against the deletion of penalty for concealed income was dismissed by the Tribunal based on the reversal of the quantum addition and the lack of substantive evidence to support the revenue's claims. The decision highlighted the importance of foundational facts and material evidence in tax penalty cases, ultimately leading to the rejection of the penalty appeal.