Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2023) 08 ITAT CK 0044

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs DCIT

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 16 August 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
N.K. Billaiya, (AM) · Yogesh Kumar U.S, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Income Tax Appeal No. 1411, 1749/DEL/2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

29 paragraphs · 334 words
1.

ITA No.1411/Del/2018 and 1749/Del/2018 are cross appeals by the assessee and the revenue preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-22, New Delhi dated 29.12.2017 pertaining to A.Y.2011-12.

2.

Both these appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. The common grievance in both these appeals relates to the levy of penalty u/s.271 (1)(c) of the Act.

3.

The roots for the levy of penalty lie in the assessment order dated 13.01.2014 framed u/s.143(3) of the Act wherein the following additions were made :-

S.No.

Particulars

Amount (in Rs.)

1

Profit on sale of investment

10,27,94,88,259/-

2

Interest income not provided as income

80,52,21,000/-

3

Disallowance of depreciation u/s. 32

1,04,90,324/-

4

Disallowance u/s. 14A

49,84,91,810/-

5.

Disallowance of guest house expenses

47,43,236/-

6

Provision for standard assets

2,94,82,474/-

4.

Penalty proceedings were separately initiated and penalty were levied accordingly on the additions sustained.

5.

Before us the Counsel for the assessee stated that all the quantum additions have been deleted by this Tribunal, therefore, the penalty does not have any legs to stand. The DR fairly conceded to this.

6.

We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the contention of the Counsel. This Tribunal in ITA No.200/Del/2016 order dated 22.11.2022 had the occasion to consider the quarrel relating to the quantum additions. A careful perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that the quantum additions have been deleted. However, we find that the issue relating to the disallowance of depreciation has been set aside to the files of the AO, therefore, to this extent the AO is directed to decide the issue of levy of penalty after deciding the quantum.

7.

Since all other additions have been deleted we do not find any merit in the levy of penalty u/s. 271 (1) (c) of the Act.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed.