Itxa/2256/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -I Pune v. Dr. Manibhai Desai Gramin Bighersheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd
High Court
29 Jun 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/2256/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -I Pune v. Dr. Manibhai Desai Gramin Bighersheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd
Date of order
29 Jun 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/2256/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -I Pune v. Dr. Manibhai Desai Gramin Bighersheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2256 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Pune
..Appellant.
V/s.
Dr. Manjibhai Desai Gramin BighershetiSahakari Patsanstha Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr. Vimal Gupta for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA JJ.
DATED : 29TH JUNE, 2011
P.C. :-
1.Whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal.
2.On perusal of the order of the ITAT particularly para 10 thereof, it is seen that the Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that the
assessee taken corrective measures immediately after the lapse was brought to the notice of the assessee. Moreover, similar question raised by the revenue in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.
Bandhkam Khate Sevakanchi Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit [Income Tax Appeal No.156 of 2009] dated 18th March, 2009 has been dismissed by this Court. Hence we see no reason to entertain this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
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.