In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. M/S Money Care Securitiesand Financial Services Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Whether ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act is the question raised in this appeal.raised in this appeal.
Decision: Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
rrt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 4032 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-4
..Appellant.
Vs.
M/s Money Care Securitiesand Financial Services Ltd
..Respondent.
Mr. Vimal Gupta, for the Appellant.Mr.B.V.Jhaveri, for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATE : 7TH JULY, 2011.
P.C.
1. Heard.
2. Whether ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied
under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act is the question raised in this appeal.raised in this appeal.
3. The Tribunal has deleted the penalty on the ground that the issue was debatable and merely because the assessee has made issue was debatable and merely because the assessee has made
a wrong claim which is disallowed by the assessing officer,
levy penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is not justified. We see no infirmity in the order passed by the ITAT. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
( A.A. SAYED, 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