The Commissioner Of Income 16 v. Mr. Sumermal R.jain

ASN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.861 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income 16.v. Mr. Sumermal R.Jain. ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr. A. R. Malhotra with Ms. P. S. Cardozo for the Appellant.None for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : 22ND JANUARY, 2013 PC: In this appeal by the revenue for assessment year 1995-96 the following question has been proposed for our consideration. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal erred in canceling the penalty imposed u/s. 27(1)(c) amounting to Rs.23,67,954 without appreciating that quantum addition to the extent of 50% was confirmed by the ITAT and ignoring that the assessee's case falls within the provision of Explanation 5(2) to Section 27(1)(c) of the Act? 2)We find that the Tribunal has deleted the penalty under Section 27(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by following its own decision in assessee's own case for assessment year 1993-94 and 1994-95. This was done after recording the fact that similar additions made in this year was made in the assessment year 1993-94 and 1994-95 and penalty under Section 27(1)(c) of the Act was deleted. 3)Counsel for the revenue states that from the records it appears that no appeal has been filed against the order of the Tribunal for assessment year 1993-94 and 1994-95. Thus, the orders of the Tribunal for assessment year 1993-94 and 1994-95 have become final. No distinguishing feature has been shown to us in this appeal warranting taking a view different from the one taken by the Tribunal that the assessment year 1993-94 and 1994-95. Hence, we see no reason to entertain the proposed question of law. 4)Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S.SANKLECHA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)