Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (8) TMI 304 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - CIT-A deleted penalty - HELD THAT - Penalty has been deleted on the basis of the ratio laid down in the matter of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT whereby and whereunder imposition of penalty on the sole reason of wrong claim or excess claim for deduction which was not found sustainable by the authority has been nullified. It also appears and as submitted by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee that in assessee s own case, the Jurisdictional High Court 2011 (10) TMI 745 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT has been pleased to decide the identical issue in favour of the assessee by and under its judgment and order dated 18.10.2011. The photo copy of the said order has also been annexed to the Paper Book filed before us by the assessee which we have already perused and considered. We find no discrepancy in the order passed by the Ld. CIT so as to warrant interference. Hence, the appeal preferred by Revenue is found to be devoid of any merit and thus dismissed. - Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Issues:
1. Appeal against penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2008-09. 2. Deletion of penalty based on legal precedents. 3. Observations on the impact of Covid-19 on the pronouncement of orders by the Tribunal. Detailed Analysis: 1. The judgment pertains to an appeal filed by the Revenue against a penalty order dated 27.03.2013 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The appeal was directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad. The Tribunal heard the parties and reviewed the relevant materials on record before making its decision. 2. The penalty was deleted based on legal precedents, specifically referencing the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal noted that imposing a penalty solely on the grounds of a wrong or excess claim for deduction, which was not sustainable, was nullified by the legal precedent. Additionally, the Tribunal considered a judgment by the Jurisdictional High Court in favor of the assessee on an identical issue. As a result, the Tribunal found no discrepancies in the CIT's order to warrant interference, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. 3. The Tribunal also made observations regarding the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the pronouncement of orders by the Tribunal. Citing a Co-ordinate Bench's decision in another case, the Tribunal discussed the exceptional circumstances caused by the pandemic, including nationwide lockdowns and disruptions in judicial work. Considering the unprecedented situation, the Tribunal excluded the period of lockdown while computing the time limit for pronouncing orders under Rule 34(5) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. This approach was deemed pragmatic and in line with the legal framework, acknowledging the extraordinary circumstances affecting the justice delivery system. Overall, the judgment addressed the appeal against the penalty order, the legal basis for deleting the penalty, and the Tribunal's considerations regarding the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the pronouncement of orders, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.
|