Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax -v v. Roger Interprises Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi HC3 Mar 2016ITA/158/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a brief order dismissing Income Tax appeals. The Court applied a prior judgment (Roger Enterprises), setting aside the order that deleted a penalty and restoring the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the relevant assessment years.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed; the ITAT and CIT(A) orders were set aside and the AO's penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) was restored.

Commissioner of Income Tax -v Vs Roger Interprises Pvt. Ltd. — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA ITA

¶2

¶3

Tax Act 1961 ('Act') are directed against a common order dated 7^^ September 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (TTAT') in ITA No. 568/Del/2006 pertaining to the Assessment Year ('AY') 1982-83 and ITA No. 567/Del/2006 pertaining to the AY 1981-82, respectively. ITA Nos. 567 and 568/Del/2006, in turn, are against the order dated 22"'' November 2005 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ['CIT(A)'].

¶4

Admit. The following question of law is framed for consideration:

¶5

"Was the ITAT correct in confirming the order of the GIT (A) deleting the penalty levied on the Respondent Assessee under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act?"

¶6

It is conceded that these two appeals were omitted to be listed along with ITA Nos. 439/2003 and 156/2014 in which a judgment dated 4* February 2016 was rendered by the Court. By the said judgment the Assessee's appeal ITA No. 439 of 2003 was dismissed and the Revenue's appeal ITA 156 of 2014 was allowed. Consequently the impugned order dated 7th September 2012 of the ITAT and the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] were set aside and the penalty levied on the Assessee by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act by an order dated 30th January 2004 was restored.

¶7

Consequently, in terms of the judgment in Roger Enterprises P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi (supra) the question framed is answered in the negative i.e. in favour of the Revenue and against the

¶8

ITA Nos.157/2014 & 158/2014

¶9

Page 2 of 3

¶10

assessee. The impugned order dated 7th September 2012 passed by the ITAT and the order dated 22nd November 2005 passed by the CIT (A) are set aside and the orders dated 30th January 2004 passed by the AO levying penalty on the Assessee under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act for AYs 198182 and 1982-83 are restored.

¶11

The appeals are allowed in the above terms.

S. MURALIDHAR, J

VIBHUBAKHRU, J

MARCH 03, 2016 dn

ITA Nos.157/2014 & 158/2014

¶16

Page 3 of 3

Commissioner of Income Tax -v v. Roger Interprises Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income Tax -v v. Roger Interprises Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Developers & Builders Forum through Its President & Ors. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi through Principal Secretary & Ors.

M/S Metro Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Mr. Rajinder Kumar Goyal Vs Government of NCT of Delhi through Principal Secretary & Ors.

J.K Goyal Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Shri Munish Goyal Vs Government of NCT of Delhi through Principal Secretary & Ors.

ONGC Videsh Limited Vs Ito, International Taxation

ONGC Videsh Limited Vs Ito, International Taxation, Tds, Ward 2(1), New Delhi

ONGC Videsh Limited Vs Ito, International Taxation