Commissioner Of Income Tax – 19, Mumbai v. Mrs.dadanbai B. Bachani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.258 OF 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax – 19, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus Mrs.Dadanbai B. Bachani ..Respondent. Mrs.S.V. Bharucha for the appellant.Mr.J.D. Mistri, Senior Advocate with Mr.B.V. Jhaveri & Ms.Manju Sisodia for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 6[th] March 2013 P.C. : 1.In this appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 1996-97, following questions of law have been proposed for our consideration. “a)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by ignoring the fact that the assessee had not shown long term capital gain on the sale of long term assets viz. Bachani Nivas in her return of income ?Bachani Nivas in her return of income ? b)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for an amount of Rs.37,40,492/- by holding that the penalty cannot survive since in the quantum appeal the Tribunal held that the assessment order itself is invalid as proceeding under Section Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for an amount of Rs.37,40,492/- by holding that the penalty cannot survive since in the quantum appeal the Tribunal held that the assessment order itself is invalid as proceeding under Section 147 initiated vide notice under Section 148 on 10-02-2000 are void ab initio ? 2.The Revenue had filed an appeal to this Court in respect of the same respondent – assessee in the quantum proceedings being Income Tax Appeal No.257 of 2013. We have today i.e. 6[th] March 2013 by our order refused to entertain the appeal being Income Tax Appeal No.257 of 2013 filed by the Revenue. The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal setting aside the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by following its order in quantum proceedings. 3.In view of the fact that the appeal in quantum proceedings filed by the Revenue is not being entertained, no occasion to entertain the present appeal filed by the Revenue against deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would arise. 4.In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain the proposed questions of law. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S. Sanklecha, J.)(J.P. Devadhar, J.)