In Itxa/616/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iv Pune v. Ar Nagari Sahakari Path Sanstha Maryadit ..... Appellants, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal under Section 271B of the Income-tax Act. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: The question raised in this appeal is "whether the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the penalty levied under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act 1961.justified in setting aside the penalty levied under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act 1961.
Decision: Perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that the Tribunal has deleted the penalty by relying upon the decision of this court in the case of CIT Vs.Bandhkam Khate Sevakanchi Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit in Income Tax Appeal No.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.884 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Incoem Tax-IV, PuneV/s.Bhavsar Nagari Sahakari Path Sanstha Maryadit
..... Appellants
..... Respondents
----
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellants.
None for the respondents.
----
CORAM : J.P.DEVADHAR &
MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATE :24/1/ 2011
P.C.
1. The question raised in this appeal is "whether the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the penalty levied under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act 1961.justified in setting aside the penalty levied under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act 1961.
2. Perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that the Tribunal has deleted the penalty by relying upon the decision of this court in the case of CIT Vs.Bandhkam Khate Sevakanchi Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit in Income Tax Appeal No. 156 of 2009 decided on 18.3.2009. Since the decision of the Tribunal is based on the deleted the penalty by relying upon the decision of this court in the case of CIT Vs.Bandhkam Khate Sevakanchi Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit in Income Tax Appeal No. 156 of 2009 decided on 18.3.2009. Since the decision of the Tribunal is based on the
decision of this Court, we see no reason to entertain this appeal. Appeal is dismissed.
(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,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.