Op/19601/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri.r.bharatan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2007 / 5TH SRAVANA 1929 OP.No. 19601 of 1999(S) ---------------------------------- RA 289/1998 IN ITA.758/COCH/1992 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------------ THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TRIVANDRUM.- BY STANDING COUNSEL, GOVT. OF INDIA (TAXES) SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.) & SRI.GEORGE K.GEORGE RESPONDENT: --------------------- SRI.R.BHARATHAN, KOCHAPPALLIL VEEDU, THEKKEVILA, ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------ O.P.No.19601 of 1999-S ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 27[th] day of July, 2007 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The Revenue has filed this petition under Section 256(2) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short), inter alia, requesting us to direct the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal to state the case and refer the questions of law that wouldarise in I.T.A.No.758 of 1992 dated 26[th] August, 1998 for the assessment year1984-85. The questions of law raised by the Revenue are as under: “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in cancelling thelevy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case and concealment under the law being in the returnfiled, the Tribunal is right in law in relying on the decision ofM.P.High Court reported in 232 ITR 34? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case is production of books of accounts an answer to theconcealment in the return?” (2) The Tribunal has rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Revenue had filed an application under Section 256(1) of the Act requestingthe Tribunal to state the case and refer the questions of law that would arise inI.T.A.No.758 of 1992 for the assessment year 1984-85. The Tribunal hasrejected the application. (3) We have carefully perused the order passed by the Tribunal andalso the questions of law raised by the Revenue for consideration and decisionby this Court. In our opinion, the questions of law raised by the Revenue require consideration by this Court. Therefore, a direction requires to be issuedto the Tribunal to state the case and refer the questions of law that would arisein I.T.A.No.758 of 1992 dated 26.8.1998 for the assessment year 1984-85. (4) Accordingly, the following: Order i) The petition is allowed. ii) A direction is issued to the Tribunal to state the case and refer thequestions of law that would arise in I.T.A.No.758 of 1992 dated 26.8.1998 forthe assessment year 1984-85 for consideration and decision by this Court, asexpeditiously as possible. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE vns (K.T.SANKARAN) JUDGE