The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-Ii v. Mr.siddarth Mulchandani
High Court
07 May 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-Ii v. Mr.siddarth Mulchandani
Date of order
07 May 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-Ii v. Mr.siddarth Mulchandani, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
bsb
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 2664 OF 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-II
… Appellant
v/s
Mr.Siddarth Mulchandani
… Respondent
Mr.A.R. Malhotra with Mr.N.A. Kazi for the appellant.
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & G.S. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATED : 7TH MAY, 2014
P. C. :
1Having heard Mr.Malhotra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue and perusing with his assistance the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, on 29[th] April, 2011 deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c ) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, we are of the opinion that the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. The deletion of penalty was justified and considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to the assessee. Not only the return was scrutinized but it was found that the entire
tax was already paid in the form of T.D.S. The assessee claimed refund. The Assessing Officer accepted the claim and refunded the amount to the assessee. We do not find, therefore, any justification for the Assessing Officer to conclude that the assessee concealed the particulars of income or furnished the inaccurate particulars. In these circumstances, the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. It is accordingly dismissed.
(G.S. KULKARNI, J.)
(S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, 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.