2012 (7) TMI 1087

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inst an order dated 14.02.2012 of the ld. CIT(A)-III, New Delhi, raises the following grounds:- "1 On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in cancelling the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1(c) on account of disallowance of ₹ 2,53,02,920/- u/s 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules, 1962. 2.On t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 00,000/- and exempted income of Rs.Rs.276,75,30,877/- Inter alia, an amount of Rs.Rs.4,69,15,726/-was disallowed u/s 94(7) of the Act as against disallowance of ₹ 2,95,03,308 offered by the assessee besides disallowance of Rs.Rs.30,26,725/- in terms of provisions of sec.14A of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act were also initiated. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the afor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndings of the ld. CIT(A). At the outset, both the parties are agreed that the aforesaid two additions, forming the basis of aforesaid penalty, having been set aside by the ITAT vide their decision dated 9.3.12 in quantum appeal in ITA no.2003/Del/2009 to the file of the AO for re-adjudication, penalty does not survive at this stage. 5. We have heard both the parties and gone through the facts of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e is l iable to be cancel led. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. R.Dalmia,(1992)107 Taxation 107, held that no penalty survives af ter delet ion of additions, forming the basis for the levy of penalty. Similar view was taken in Addl. Commissioner of Income tax v. Badri Kashi Prasad (1993] 200 ITR 206 (Al l) and Prabhat Oil Traders v. Income-tax Officer (No. 3) (1996) 218 ITR (A.T.) 3 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ground nos. 1 & 2 in the appeal are disposed of. 6. Ground no.3 in the appeal, being general in nature, does not require any separate adjudication while no additional ground having been raised before us in terms of residuary ground no.4 in the appeal, accordingly, these grounds are dismissed. 7. No other plea or argument was made before us. 8. In the result, appeal is dismissed.
Case laws, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X