Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Malkit Kaur Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh)
Related Assessment Year : 2015-16
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.

Malkit Kaur Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh)

Penalty can’t survive when quantum is unsettled: ITAT Chandigarh remands 271 penalty to await fate of addition

Chandigarh Tribunal held that penalty proceedings cannot attain finality when the very quantum addition forming the foundation of penalty stands remanded. Tribunal noted that the quantum addition had already been set aside & remanded to CIT(A) by ITAT vide order dated 30-05-2025. Since penalty is merely an offshoot of quantum proceedings, confirmation of penalty by CIT(A)/NFAC without await

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

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

PCIT-263 Upheld for Inadequate Inquiry in Search Assessment: ITAT Mumbai Section 69C Not Invokable: ITAT Mumbai Dismisses Revenue Appeal in Bogus 80GGC Case Section 54 Deduction Allowed Even If Original Return Was Not Filed: ITAT Mumbai No Section 271AAA Penalty Where Search Disclosure Was Proper: ITAT Kolkata Bogus Purchases: ITAT Mumbai Restricts Addition to 5% Where Sales Are Undisputed View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
January 2026
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031