Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Delhi-Iii v. Diligent Services Private Limited
High Court
28 Mar 2016 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Delhi-Iii v. Diligent Services Private Limited
Date of order
28 Mar 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Delhi-Iii v. Diligent Services Private Limited, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: The appeal and the application are accordingly dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
23.+ ITA 210/2016
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-DELHI-III..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roy Chaudhuri, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Advocate.
versus
DILIGENT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED
..... Respondent
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
%
O R D E R28.03.2016
CM APPL No. 11350 of 2016(exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Application is disposed of.
ITA No. 210 of 2016 & CM APPL No. 11351 of 2016
3. This is an appeal directed against the order dated 28[th] October 2014 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA No. 510/Del/2012 for the Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2006-07.
4. This is a penalty appeal where the only question urged is whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied on the Respondent Assessee under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
ITA No.210/2016 Page 1 of 2
5. Having heard learned counsel for the Appellant, the Court is of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no legal infirmity in the impugned order of the ITAT. No substantial question of law arises for consideration.
6. The appeal and the application are accordingly dismissed.
S.MURALIDHAR, J
MARCH 28, 2016
mg
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
ITA No.210/2016 Page 2 of 2
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.