Penalty order passed after 6 Months of ITAT confirmation is time barred

Brief of the case:

The ITAT ,Delhi in the case of. ITO vs. Pandit Vijay Kant Sharma concluded that The limitation period of six months and not one year is applicable in case the penalty order is passed by the AO pursuant to confirmation of penalty by the tribunal because the proviso to Sec 275(1)(a) does not cover the order passed by the tribunal.

Facts of the case:

The AO on the confirmation of disallowances and penalties by the ITAT, passed an order for levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) . The CIT (A) deleted the penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) on the ground that the penalty order was time barred. Against such deletion AO filed an appeal before the tribunal.

Contention of the Revenue:

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.