Ita/174/2006 Of The Commr. Of Income Tax-I Chd v. Anoop Bansal

ITA No. 174 of 2006 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT QORKR PUNJAB AND HARYANA.AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 174 of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.04.2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh ....... Appellant )#*&+& Shri Anoop Bansal ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present:Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocatefor the appellant. RAJESH BINDAL,J. This appeal has been filed under Section 260 A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), against the order dated12.9.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ChandigarhBench (A), in ITA No. 602/Chandi/2003, for the assessment year1990-91, raising the following substantial question of law; Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in deleting the penaltyu/s 271 D when the assessee deliberately violated theprovision of Section 269 SS of the Income Tax Actand no bonafide reason existed in the case of theassessee? Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted thatin view of circular No21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 read with circularNo.279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, issued by CentralBoard of Direct Taxes, she does not wish to press the present appeal, asthe tax effect involved is less than |LT20 lacs. However, she prays thatliberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal in case something survives therein, Dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. It ishowever, Clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shallnot be taken as affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. The legalissue aS Claimed by the revenue is left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case. (RAJESH BINDAL)JUDGE 11.04.2016*##/! (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU)JUDGEH