Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/5197/2010 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/5197/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 18 Mumbai v. Mala Bajaj

High Court 14 Jun 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/5197/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 18 Mumbai v. Mala Bajaj
Date of order
14 Jun 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/5197/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 18 Mumbai v. Mala Bajaj, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: R.P.SONDURBALDOTA JJ.DATED : 14TH JUNE, 2011 P.C. :- 1.The only question raised in this appeal is, whether the ITAT was right in deleting penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax, 1961.

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.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5197 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. Smt. Mala Bajaj..Respondent. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant. Ms. Aasifa Khan for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA JJ.DATED : 14TH JUNE, 2011 P.C. :- 1.The only question raised in this appeal is, whether the ITAT was right in deleting penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax, 1961. The finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal in para No.18 of its Judgment is that at the time of assessment the assessee had disclosed all the material facts relevant for assessment. The Tribunal has further recorded that the calculation of capital gains and the value of the land has been subject matter of litigation between the assessee and the department and the figure of market value of the land has changed with every stage of litigation. Thus, it is a case honest difference of opinion between the assessee and the department. In our opinion, the discretion exercised by the Tribunal is just and proper. No question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, 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