Income Tax

When quantum appeal restored, penalty can’t be levied for non-payment of demand

When quantum appeal stands restored to the AO, penalty can not be levied u/s 221(1) of the Income Tax Act for non -payment of the demand.

In a recent judgment, Allahabad ITAT has held that when the quantum appeal stands restored to the file of the AO and the demand has been vacated, the question of levying penalty under section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 for non -payment of the said demand does not arise.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
5077 (2026) (03) abcaus.in ITAT

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in confirming confirmed a penalty of Rs. 1 Lac levied by the Assessing Officer under section 221 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The assessment order was passed under section 153D(1)(B) of the Act r.w.s. 143(3). While passing the assessment order, the AO had made some additions and assessed the income of the assessee instead of the declared income.

After assessment, a demand had been raised which became due for payment. Subsequently, a notice under section 221(1) had been issued to the assessee and subsequently the AO had also allowed installments, vide an order. The AO recorded that three more notices under section 221(1) were issued followed by a show cause notice under section 276C(2). However, the assessee expressed its inability to make the payment. Subsequently, further notices under section 221(1) were issued.

However, assessee did not make any payment within the allowed time limit. Therefore, the AO after examining the ITR which showed that the assessee had sundry debtors of large amount held that the assessee had sufficient funds but was willfully avoiding the payment of tax.

Accordingly, he decided to impose a penalty (being the average 10% of balance demand) by treating the assessee in default under section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act. 

Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted that the penalty was not leviable because the ITAT had restored the assessment back to the file of the AO, the demand no longer survived and therefore, the penalty was not maintainable.

The Revenue did not dispute the fact that following the restoration of the assessment back to the file of the AO, the earlier demand did not survive.

The Tribunal held that since the quantum appeal stood restored to the file of the AO and the demand had been vacated, the question of levying penalty under section 221(1) for non -payment of the said demand does not arise.

Therefore, the penalty was deleted. 

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • ICSI

Empanelment of General Observers for ICSI Examinations December 2026. Last date 16.11.2026

Empanelment of General Observers for ICSI Examinations December 2026 ICSI has invited interested members to enroll as General Observers for…

7 hours ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT address some important issues relating to deduction u/s 80IA

ITAT answers some important and inter-related issues relating to deduction u/s 80IA In a recent judgment, ITAT has dealt with…

10 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Mere carry forward of loss can not be denied for belated return – ITAT

Carry forward of loss can not be denied for belated return, it is only the set off in subsequent year…

1 week ago
  • Income Tax

Sales duly recorded in books & VAT returns, can’t be held bogus without cogent adverse material

Where sales are duly recorded in books and VAT returns, to treat it bogus sales, AO must bringing cogent adverse…

2 weeks ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT allows Diwali expenses incurred by assessee as business expenses

Expenses to celebrate Diwali with staff creates a goodwill and, therefore amounts to expenses incurred for the purpose of business…

2 weeks ago
  • Income Tax

Section 292BB does not bar assessee to raise objection for non issuance of notice u/s 143(2) – SC

Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 does not preclude Assessee raising objection for non issuance of notice u/s…

2 weeks ago