In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Patel Glass Corporation, the High Court (2000) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: 271B read with sections 271 and 275 of the Income-tax Act, the following substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal : "Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the penalty imposed by interpreting sec.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX APPLICATION No 1 of 2000
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO 1 to 5� No -------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXVersus
PATEL GLASS CORPORATION
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
Date of decision: 13/09/2000
ORAL JUDGEMENT
�On this application rule was issued. The
respondent-assessee has been served. No one appears on
its behalf.
�After hearing the learned counsel for the
department and examining the provisions of Sec. 271B
read with sections 271 and 275 of the Income-tax Act, the
following substantial question of law arises from the
order of the Tribunal :
"Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law
in cancelling the penalty imposed by interpreting
sec. 271B of the Act with the aid of sections
271 and 275 of the said Act and holding that
penalty under sec. 271B can be imposed only by
initiating proceedings in the course of
assessment?"
�The application is allowed and the Tribunal is directed to prepare a Statement of Case and refer the above question for decision of this Court.
directed to prepare a Statement of Case and refer the
�Rule is made absolute.
______
���(D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J.)
���(A.R. Dave, J.)
(hn)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.