AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2019-20, arise s against the CIT(A)-23, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1074809253(1) dated 21.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It transpires at the outset during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from bo th the parties that the learned lower authorities have levied section 271D penalty of Rs.75 ,08,750/- in the assessee’s hands; in the Assessing Officer’s order dated 12.04.2024 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
The Reve nue argued in support of the impugned penalty that the same has arisen from section 132 search action dated 17.08.2020 in M/s Panjil Batra group of cases indicating the assessee to have received advances in lieu of alleged transfer of land in cash representing a portion of the entire sale price. It could hardly dispute the clinching fact e manating from the case records that this tribunal in the assessee’s quantum appeal ITA No. 2806/Del/2024 has quashed the impugned assessment dated 15.03.2023 itself as not framed in furtherance to a proper section 153C satisfaction.
Faced with this situation, we hereby conclude that the impugned penalty has no legs to stand once the corresponding assessment itself stand quashed going by sublato fundamento cadit opus i.e. when the foundation itself does not exist; any super structure raised thereupon falls automatically, to delete the penalty in question levie d by bo th the learned lower authorities in very terms
This Revenue's appeal is dismissed.