Itta/243/2008 Of Y.rama Chandra Reddy v. Asst.commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE [P.SAM.KOSHY]ANI)THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE SUDDALA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL [NO: 243 OF 2008] lncome tax Tribunal Appeal under Section [260-4 ][of ][the ][lncome ][tax ][Act, ][1961,]against the order dated 27.07.2007, [passed ][in ][l.I. ][(S.S.)A' ][No ][63iHyd/2003 ][for]Block period 1987-88 to 1997-98 on [the ][file ][of ][the ][lncome ][Tax ][Appellate Tribunal,]Hyderabad Bench, ["8" ]Hyderabad [preferred ][against ][the ][order dated ][26.03-2003]passed in Appeal No. 177lAC-3(4)lClT(A)-lV/2002-03 [on ][the ][file ][of ][the]commissioner of lncome Tax [(Appeals)-lV, ][Hyderabad. preferred against ][the ][order]dated 30.03.1999 [passed in Dy. Commissioner ][of ][Income ]-Tax, [lnvestigation ][circle]1(1), Hyderabad. Between: Y.Rama Chandra Reddy, R/o.843, [Yeturi ][Banjara ][Avenue, ][Banjara ][Hills,]Hyderabad. ...APPellant AND Asst.Commissioner of lncome [Tax, O/o.Circle-3 ][(4), ][Hyderabad] ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant [: ][Mr. A. ][V. ][Krishna Koundinya] Counsel for the Respondent [: ][Ms ][Bokaro ][Sapna Reddy Senior ][Standing]Counsel for the lncome Tax [Department] The Court delivered the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM AND TIIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDAIA CHALAPATHI I.T.T.A. No.243 of 2OO8 JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) The instant appeal has been frled by the appellant aggrieved [by] the order dated 27.O7.2OO7 rn I.T.(SS).A.No.63/Hyd/2OO3 [(Block]Period 1987-88 to 1997-9q passed by the Income-Tax [Appellate]Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench B', (for short,'the impugned order'!. Heard Mr.A.V. Krishna Koundinya, Koundinya, learned counsel for counsel for for the 2. Heard Mr.A.V. Krishna Koundinya, Koundinya, learned counsel for counsel for for theappellant; and Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Senior [Standing]Counsel for the Income Tax Department, for the respondent. 3. Vide the impugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofthe impugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofimpugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofTribunal was testing the veracity ofwas testing the veracity ofofthe order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax [(Appeals) ][IV,]Hyderabad, dated 26.03.2O03, whereby the Commissioner of Appealshad confrrmed lery of penalty under Section 158BFA(2) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961. Vide the impugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofthe impugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofimpugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofTribunal was testing the veracity ofwas testing the veracity ofof To-day, when the matter is the matter is matter is is taken up for hearing, learnedup for hearing, learnedhearing, learnedlearned 4. To-day, when the matter is the matter is matter is is taken up for hearing, learnedup for hearing, learnedhearing, learnedlearnedStanding Counsel for the Income Tax Department, [appearing ][for ][the]respondent, has brought to the notice of the Court that [against ]the Vide the impugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofthe impugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofimpugned order, the Tribunal was testing the veracity ofTribunal was testing the veracity ofwas testing the veracity ofof To-day, when the matter is the matter is matter is is taken up for hearing, learnedup for hearing, learnedhearing, learnedlearned 4. To-day, when the matter is the matter is matter is is taken up for hearing, learnedup for hearing, learnedhearing, learnedlearnedStanding Counsel for the Income Tax Department, [appearing ][for ][the]respondent, has brought to the notice of the Court that [against ]the Original Order of Assessment for the Block Period 1987-88 to 1997-98, the appellant had already challenged the same zzde I.T.T.A.No.196of 2003 before this Court. Vide order dated 28.10.2014, a learned98, the appellant had already challenged the same zzde I.T.T.A.No.196of 2003 before this Court. Vide order dated 28.10.2014, a learnedDivision Bench of this Cor-rrt dismissed the said appeal and confrrmedthe order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.(SS)A.No.16lHyd/2O01, dated23.17.2001. However, the said order of the learned Division Benchhas attained frnality as it had not been questioned / challengedfurther by the appellant herein.5. Given the fact that the Assessment Order itself has beenconlrrmed up till stage of the High Court uide order dated 28.10.2014,the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.(SS)A.No.16lHyd/2O01, dated23.17.2001. However, the said order of the learned Division Benchhas attained frnality as it had not been questioned / challengedfurther by the appellant herein.5. Given the fact that the Assessment Order itself has beenconlrrmed up till stage of the High Court uide order dated 28.10.2014,I.T.T.A.No.196 of 2OO3, we are of the considered opinion that levy ofpenalty by the respondent-Authorities for the block assessment for theperiod 1987-88 to 1997-98 under Section 158BFA(2) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 on the appellant herein, cannot be found fault with.Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the question of lawTherefore, we are of the considered opinion that the question of lawframed while admitting the instant appeal as to ulether the Tribunalwas justified in confirming the penalty levied by the respondent-Authorities is answered in favour of Revenue and against appellant-was justified in confirming the penalty levied by the respondent-Authorities is answered in favour of Revenue and against appellant-assessee herein 6. Therefore, the instant Appeal fails and the same deserves to beand is accordingly dismissed. No costs. 7 . Miscellaleous petitions, [pending ]if any, shall [stand ][closed.] Sd/. T. VIJAY KUMARDEPUW REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//SETION OFFICER To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, ["8" ][Hyderabad.] 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax [(Appeals)-lV, ]Hyderabad. 3. The Dy. Commissioner of lncome -Tax, lnvestigation Circle [1(1),]Hyderabad.Hyderabad. 4. one CC to Mr. A. V. Krishna Koundinya, Advocate 5. one CC to Ms Bokaro Sapna Reddy Standing Counsel [for ][the ][lncome]Tax Department [oPUC]Tax Department [oPUC] 6. Two CD Copies DL/PSL HIGH COURT DATED:1810812025 '--_ s'r4 r{-l.It0 sEP [2flfr]I\JUGMENTITTA.No.243 of 2008 DISMISSING THE APPEALv