Allowed

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur v. M/S Rajendrakumar,Nagpur

Bombay HC21 Apr 2007ITA/76/1995

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a reference application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 filed by the Revenue. The High Court held that questions regarding the deletion of penalty and the البلاط of the assessee to Section 271(1)(c) arose from the Tribunal's order. The application was allowed, directing the Tribunal to forward the statement of case.

What did the court decide?

The reference application was allowed; the applicant is directed to submit the statement of case on the questions of law.

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur Vs M/S Rajendrakumar,Nagpur — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶3

INCOME-TAX APPLICATION NO. 76 OF 1995

¶4

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶5

Court's or Judge's orders

¶6

CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, JJ. APRIL 21, 2007.

¶7

Heard Shri Parchure, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Chandurkar, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶8

This reference application filed by the revenue under Section 256(2) of the Incometax Act, 1961, was admitted on the following questions of law :

¶9

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 2,47,000/- levied for concealment of income ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee has given explanation which is plausible and it cannot be said that there was any concealment of income involved ?

¶10

Whether on the facts and in the

¶11

¶12

circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that inspite of the facts brought on record as a result of investigation done, that the assessee had not come within the purview of Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?

¶13

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the penalty without due appreciation of relevant facts and material brought on record ?”

¶14

The assesment year involved herein is Assessment Year 1987-88.

¶15

In this case, the Assessing Officer made additions of Rs.5,90,000/- on the ground that the assessee had claimed expenses which were found to be bogus. According to the revenue, it is only after the Assessing Officer established by recording statement of the partners of the firm, transporters etc. to the effect that the assessee had resorted to concealment of income, the assessee had filed revised return and therefore the levy of penalty was justified and the Tribunal committed an error in deleting the penalty.

¶16

In our opinion, in view of the

¶17

¶18

admissions made by the partners of the firm and also transporters, the question as to whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty is a question of law that arises from the order of the Tribunal.

¶19

In this view of the matter, the Tribunal is directed to forward the statement of the case on the aforesaid questions of law as expeditiously as possible. Present application is accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs.

¶20

JUDGE

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

*GS.

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur v. M/S Rajendrakumar,Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur v. M/S Rajendrakumar,Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur Vs Tr.Lahoti,Amravati

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur Vs Tr.Lahoti,Amravati

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur Vs Shri T.R.Lahoti, Amraoti

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur Vs M/S Abhay Traders,Malkapur

M/S.Jayantilal Dwarkadas Akola Vs Cokmmissioner of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur.

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur Vs M/S Abhijit Iron Processors Pvt. Ltd.