Case LawHigh Court › Ita/54/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Incom...

Ita/54/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Arvind N. Choksey

High Court 06 Mar 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Ita/54/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Arvind N. Choksey
Date of order
06 Mar 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/54/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Arvind N. Choksey, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.

Issue: The above application has been admitted on the following question of law:- " Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned ITAT was justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs.84,960/- levied by the A.O.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.54 OF 1999 INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.54 OF 1999 The Commissioner of Income tax ..Petitioner. V/s. Arvind N. Choksey ..Respondent. Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for Petitioner. Mr.B.V.Jhaveri for respondent. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 6TH MARCH, 2007. DATED : 6TH MARCH, 2007. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) ORAL JUDGMENT (PER DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. The above application has been admitted on the following question of law:- " Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned ITAT was justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs.84,960/- levied by the A.O. U/s.271(1) (c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 ? " 2. The application pertains to the assessment year 1980-81. 3. We have perused the order of the ITAT. From - = : 2 : = - the question, it is apparent that the tax liability is only Rs.84,960/- and the same is less than Rs.2 lakhs. In view of the Revenue Circular dated 27th March, 2000, Rule stands discharged. 4. Application stands disposed of. (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan