| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 2010 2005 SLD 2010 (2005) 272 ITR 377 |
Punjab and Haryana High Court
IT CASE No. 8 OF 1997 MARCH 8, 2004
N.K. SUD AND HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
IT CASE No. 8 OF 1997 MARCH 8, 2004
N.K. SUD AND HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Commissioner of IncomE tax
v.
Rajan Kumar
Law:
Section:
Section 271(1)(c), read with section 256, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income - Assessment year 1981-82 - Tribunal confirmed deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) and also rejected revenue's reference application under section 256(1) on ground that it had already rejected revenue's reference application against quantum appeal - However, revenue's reference petition under section 256(2) in quantum appeals had already been allowed by High Court and Tribunal on direction of High Court had already referred question of law arising out of its order in those appeals - Whether in view of above, Tribunal was to be directed to refer question of law as to whether Tribunal was right in upholding deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Held, yes FACTS The Tribunal confirmed the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who deleted the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 1981-82. The application of the revenue under section 256(1) was rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that it had already rejected the revenue's reference application against the quantum appeal. On application under section 256(2): HELD The petitioner had brought to notice that reference petition under section 256(2) in the quantum appeals had already been allowed by the High Court and the Tribunal on the direction of the High Court had already referred the question of law arising out of its order. In view of the above, the revenue deserved to succeed. Accordingly, the petition was allowed with the direction to the Tribunal to prepare a statement of the case and refer the question of law as to whether the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c), for the opinion of the High Court. Note : The case was decided in favour of the revenue. R.P. Sawhney and Kishan Singh for the Petitioner. Varun Gupta and Akshay Bhan for the Respondent. JUDGMENT  N.K. Sud, J.- The Revenue has filed this petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (for short "the Act"), relating to the assessment year 1981-82 praying that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short "the Tribunal"),…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492