The Cit-12 v. Pankaj N.mehta

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1174 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1174 OF 2008 The CIT-12 .. Appellant Vs. Pankaj N.Mehta .. Respondent Mr.R.A.Vaishampayan for the Appellant. Ms.Usha Dalal for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, JJ. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, JJ. DATE : 2nd December, 2008 DATE : 2nd December, 2008 P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By this Appeal, the Appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon.Tribunal was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer not to charge interest u/s.234A for the period from 1.04.1997 to 30th April, 1998." 2. Perused the Tribunal’s order dated 28.2.2008 wherein in paragraph No.9 the Tribunal has observed as under:- "In the facts of the present case before us, where the Return of Income was due to be filed by 31.10.1995 or the extended time allowed under Section 139(4) of the I.T.Act, the assessee failed to furnish the Return of Income. Thereafter the assessee had no remedy of filing the Return of Income. Once the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 02.04.1998, the assessee filed the Return and paid the taxes accordingly, in the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case before us and applying the ratio of SMC Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Ms.Priti Pithawala V/s.ITO (supra), we uphold the order of CIT (A) and dismiss the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue." 3. The learned Counsel for the Appellant produced before us a copy of the ITAT Order in the case of Priti PritiPithawala V/s.ITO - ITA No.6382/Mum/2002 and other Pithawala V/s.ITO - ITA No connected matters. In the light of the above, we do not find any substantial question of law involved in this Appeal. Appeal is totally devoid of merits and hence the same stands dismissed. (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J