The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Arun Mantex Pvt. Ltd

ASN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3397 OF 2005IN INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG. NO. 1463 OF 2005 The Commissioner of Income Tax.Vs.M/s. Arun Mantex Pvt. Ltd.Mr.S.M. Shah with P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. ..Appellant...Respondents. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED : 24th March,2008. PC : 1. There is a delay of 119 days. Considering the cause shown, delay condoned, Office to register the appeal. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG. NO. 1463 OF 2005 The Commissioner of Income Tax. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Arun Mantex Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondents. Mr.S.M. Shah with P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATED : 24th March,2008. PC : A.O. are without causing any proper enquiry and hence, not justified. 2. Next addressed himself to the question whether thepenalty can be imposed even in the absence of positiveincome and relied on the Judgment in the case ofPrithipal Singh and Co. of the Punjab & Haryana HighCourt and held that the word "income" in clause (c) and(iii) of Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,1961refers to positive income only. After considering the various contentions held that the tax could not be levied. the Commissioner (Appeals) that the penalty under Section 271(1) is not leviable. 4. The learned Tribunal held that the judgment ofPrithipal Singh 249 ITR 670 would not be applicable inso far as present case is concerned. However, as therewas no addition, the penalty was not leviable. In sofar as other part of the judgment, the matter was was dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)