In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-21 v. M/S. Shivling Construction, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: P.C.: The only issue which has been raised in the Appeal by the revenue is whether the Tribunal is justified in cancelling the penalty which was levied under Section 271 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Decision: The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O. O. C. J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2624 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax-21..Appellant.Vs.M/s. Shivling Construction..Respondent.
..Respondent.
....
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.Mr. Hemant Judia for the Respondent.
....
CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD &J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
8[th] January, 2010.
P.C.:
The only issue which has been raised in the Appeal by the revenue is whether the Tribunal is justified in cancelling the penalty which was levied under Section 271 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is common ground before the Court that as a matter of fact the VDIS certificate was not issued. A regular assessment was carried out. The Tribunal held that the assessee had neither submitted inaccurate particulars nor had he concealed any income. In these
circumstances, the cancellation of the order of penalty cannot be faulted. No substantial question of law arises. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(Dr. D.Y.Chandrachud, J.)
(J.P. Devadhar, 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.
EaseValue