T.a./62/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Md.sayeed
High Court
18 Dec 2012 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jhar_pg
Parties
T.a./62/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Md.sayeed
Date of order
18 Dec 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In T.a./62/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Md.sayeed, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Therefore, there is no merit in this appeal which is, accordingly, dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
Sudhir
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI T.A. No. 62 of 2008
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central,
Central Revenue Building, Beer Chand
Patel Marg, Patna ..
... Appellant
Vrs.
Md. Sayeed ......Respondent
------
CORAM:HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICEHON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY
------
For the Appellant: Mr. Deepak Roshan, Sr. S.C.(IT)For the Respondents: Mr. Binod Poddar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Piyush Poddar, Adv. Ms. Amrita Sinha, Adv.
th December, 2012.
Dated 18
Only question raised before us by the appellant-Revenue is with respect to the challenge to the part of the order dated 31.1.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna by which the learned Tribunal has cancelled the penalty on Rs.4,49,600/- and confirmed the penalty on Rs.1,76,00,000/-.
After going through the reasons given in the order dated 31.1.2008 passed by the learned Tribunal, we are of the considered opinion that no question of law is involved and it is a question of fact on the basis of which the penalty on income of Rs.4,49,600/- has been cancelled. Therefore, there is no merit in this appeal which is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Prakash Tatia,C.J.)
(Jaya Roy, 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.