The High Court disposed of a税务 appeal against penalty u/s 271(1)(c). Noting that the imposed penalty of Rs.11,15,112 falls within the ceiling limit of Circular No.21/2015, the court dismissed the appeal, leaving the substantive questions of law open.
The appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are left open.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 8/6/2016
The Honourable Mr.Justice S.Manikumar and The Honourable Mr.Justice D.Krishnakumar
Tax Case Appeal No.357 of 2016
Commissioner of Income Tax IV No.121 Nungambakkam High Road Chennai 600 034. ...Appellant/Appellant
Vs
Mr.Leander Fernandes Arnold Flat 4 G Block L-Opera VGN Nagar Phase I Nolumbur Mogappair West Chennai 600 037.
... Respondent/Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under section 260A of Income Tax Act,1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench dated 29/7/2015 in ITA No.2140/Mds/2014 against the Order of the Commissioner of Income tax(A)-II, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34 dated 18/3/2014 made in ITA.NO.1535/2013-14 dated 18/3/2014 and
against the penalty order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Company Ward II(1), Chennai dated 24/11/2011 made in GIR.NO./PAN AAAPF5324J.
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J)
This Appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, dated 29/7/2015.
“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in cancelling the penalty levied under Section 271 (1) (c) on the Short Term Capital Gains not declared and paid by the assessee? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in cancelling the penalty levied under Section 271 (1) (c) when the explanations offered by the assessee are not bona fide and deliberate failure on the part of the assessee to offer income?”
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras A bench Chennai
2.The Commissioner of Income-Tax(A)-II 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34 3.The Income Tax Officer, Company ward-II(1) Chennai +1 cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Advocate sr.30737 Tax Case Appeal No.357 of 2016 ev(co) aa23/06/2016
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in cancelling the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) on Short Term Capital Gains not declared and paid by the assessee?
Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in cancelling the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) when the explanations offered by the assessee are not bona fide?
Whether the appeal should be disposed of under Circular No.21/2015 once the penalty amount falls within the ceiling limit specified therein?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Commissioner of Income Tax IV No.121 Nungambakkam High Road Chennai
Mr.Leander Fernandes Arnold
S.Manikumar
D.Krishnakumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
