AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Mahavir Singh, VP :
These four appeals by the Assessee are arising out of the respective orders of the Ld. Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi confirming the levy of penalty made by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) amounting to Rs. 2,09,30,773/-; levy of penalty made u/s. 271F amounting to Rs. 20,000/-/-; levy of penalty made u/s. 271(1)(b) amounting to Rs. 20,000/- for the relevant assessment year 2016-17 and levy of penalty made u/s. 271AAC(1) amounting to Rs. 26,65,097/- for the assessment year 2017-18.
At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the aforesaid four penalties which have been made under sections 271(1)(c); 271F; 271(1)(b) and 271AAC(1) respectively are arising out of the assessments framed and that assessments have been quashed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 5113 & 5114/Del/2025 (AYrs 2016-17 & 2017-18) vide common order dated 24.12.2025 wherein, the reassessment proceedings initiated for both the assessment years were quashed by observing in paras 12 to 15 as under:-
“..12. In view of the facts and circumstances and respectfully agree with the finding of the Coordinate Bench ITA No. 1100/Del/2025 (Supra) referred and the notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 29.7.2022 for AY 2016-17 as well as AY 2017-18 are liable to be quashed as the same are not issued with the permission of the competent authority. In the cases before us the notice u/s. 148 of the Act is dated 29.7.2022 and the same has been issued after expiry of three years of the relevant assessment years i.e. 31.03.2017 (AY 2016-17) and 31.3.2018 (AY 2017-18), thus in terms of section 151(ii) of the Act the sanction was required to be approved by the Pr. Chief Commissioner or the Pr. Director General or where there is no such authority, by the Chief Commissioner or Director General. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Ld. Coordinate bench ITA No. 3395 (supra), the legal ground raised by the assessee in both the appeals, accordingly allowed in favour of the assessee. The notice u/s. 148 dated 29.7.2022 in both the appeals are held to be bad in law and the assessment order dated 16.5.2023 and 23.5.2023 respectively in both the appeals stands quashed.
13.In view of the decision on the additional ground / legal ground, the decision on another grounds rendered academic and we keep the same open for adjudication. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms.
ITA NO. 5114/Del/2025, AY 2017-18
14.In view of the finding return in ITA No. 5114/Del/2025 since, the facts and issues are identical and the notice under section 148 of the Act is issued on same date, the findings returned in ITA No. 5113/Del/2025, (AY 2016-17) shall mutatis mutandis apply to this appeal also. The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms in favour of the assessee. 15. In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed.”
Once the reassessment is quashed and reopening is held bad in law initiated u/s. 147/148 of the Act, the consequent penalties as levied by the AO does not survive. Hence, all these penalties involved in the instant appeals of the assessee are hereby deleted and accordingly, the grounds raised in all the four appeals are allowed.
To sum up, these assessee’s four appeals being ITA Nos. 5190 to 5192/Del/2025 (AY 2016-17) and ITA No. 5193/Del/2025 (AY 2017-18) are allowed in the above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.