ITA No. 3868 & 3869/Mum/2024

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

These two appeals have been preferred against the impugned orders each dated 04.06.2024 passed in Appeal nos. CIT(A)26, Mumbai/10011/2019-20 and CIT(A)26, Mumbai/10010/2019-20 respectively by the Ld. Commissioner of Income–tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] for the Assessment Years [A.Y.] 2011-12 and 2010-11 respectively, wherein learned CIT(A) has partly allowed assessee’s appeals with direction to learned assessing officer to recalculate the penalty only u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on restricted addition of Rs. 1,47,521/- and Rs. 74,005/- respectively. Both the appeals in ITA No. 3868/Mum/2024 and 3869/Mum/2024 have been filed by the Revenue on common grounds against the impugned orders each dated 04.06.2024, hence for the sake of brevity, both the appeals are being decided by a common order.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the appeals are maintainable considering the tax effect?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Revenue.

Similar Judgements

• Mansi A. Sheth vs ITO-29(2)(3), Mumbai

  Mumbai bench

• MUJAHID Vs DCIT

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21Allowed

• Jora Ram Mali Vs. ACIT, Circle – 4(2)

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2018-19 & 2019-20Allowed

• Muqeem Khan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(3), Saharanpur (U.P.)-247001

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2019-20Partly Allowed

• ITA Nos. 1603 & 1604/Del/2022(A.Ys 2009-10 & 2010-11)

• Bharat Sevashram Sangha Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions)

  Mumbai Bench benchAY NAAllowed