Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rohtak v. M/S Giani Ram & Company, Liquor Contractor

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I.T.A. No. 193 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 23.7.2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak ..........Appellant Versus M/s Giani Ram & Company, Liquor Contractor,..........RespondentMeham (Rohtak) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:-Mr. Aman Bansal, Advocatefor the appellant. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) 1.The revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, 'I', New Delhi dated 7.4.2008 passedin ITA No. 4445/Del/2005 for the assessment year 1995-96, proposing toraise following substantial question of law:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in cancelling thepenalty u/s 271(1)(c) imposed by the A.O., ignoring thefacts of the case that Revenue's appeals against thequantum additions are pending before Hon'ble HighCourt?” 2.Learned counsel for the revenue states that the assesseesucceeded in quantum matter, against which ITA No. 661 of 2008(CIT Vs. M/s Giani Ram & Company) has been dismissed by this Court on16.7.2009. 3.In view of above, this appeal is also dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE July 23, 2009pooja (DAYA CHAUDHARY)JUDGE Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No