The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 9 v. Penguin Electronics Limited
High Court
16 Sep 2011 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 9 v. Penguin Electronics Limited
Date of order
16 Sep 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 9 v. Penguin Electronics Limited, the High Court (2011) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: P.C. : DATE : 16th September 2011 1.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in modifying the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in these appeals.
Decision: Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1000 OF 2011ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1001 OF 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 9
..Appellant.
Versus
Penguin Electronics Limited..Respondent.
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.Mr.K. Gopal with Mr.Jitendra Singh for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &K.K. Tated, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 16th September 2011
1.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in modifying the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in these appeals.
2.In the present case, the assessee had furnished audit report during the course of assessment proceedings, however, the same was not in the prescribed form. The assessing officer did neither treat the report as defective nor gave an opportunity to the assessee to file the audit report in the prescribed form. However, the assessing officer examined the claim of the assessee in detail and allowed the deduction after re-working the
3.The Commissioner of Income Tax was, however, of the opinion that in view of the fact that the audit report was not submitted in the prescribed form, it must be held that the audit report was not submitted by the assessee.
4.On appeal filed by the assessee, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that when the assessee had in fact submitted the audit report along with the return of income, it was not proper on the part of the Commissioner of Income Tax to hold that the audit report was not submitted along with the return of income merely because the said report was not submitted in the prescribed form. Accordingly, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has modified the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax with a direction to the assessee to file fresh audit report in Form 10CCD and further directed the assessing officer to allow the claim of the assessee after re-working the deduction allowable under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
5.In these circumstances, in our opinion, no fault can be found with the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.
(K.K. Tated, 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.