The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Mangalam Organics Pvt. Ltd
High Court
15 Oct 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Mangalam Organics Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
15 Oct 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Mangalam Organics Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Admit on the following questions: "The substantial question of law arises in the present appeal is the correct interpretation of section 271(l)(C) of the act and whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Hon’ble tribunal is justified in cancelling the penalty levied upon the...
Decision: In the light of that in our opinion, the impugned order will have to be set aside and the matter remanded back to the tribunal for reconsideration de novo and to pass a fresh orders according to law. .
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
((-1-))
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.6 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Versus
M/s. Mangalam Organics Pvt. Ltd.... Respondent
Mr. B.M. Chatterjee with Ms. P.P. Bhosale and Mr.
P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellants.
Mr. A.K. Jasani for Respondent.
CORAM: F.I.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED: OCTOBER 15, 2007
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED: OCTOBER 15, 2007
P.C.
P.C.
. Admit on the following questions:
"The substantial question of law arises in
the present appeal is the correct
interpretation of section 271(l)(C) of the
act and whether on the facts and
circumstance of the case and in law, the
Hon’ble tribunal is justified in cancelling
the penalty levied upon the assessee u/s.
271(1)(C) of the act, without appreciating
that the disallowance of the commission
pursuant to which the penalty proceedings
where initiated, was confirmed in the
quantum appeal?"
((-2-))
. We have considered the order of the tribunal.
The Assessing Officer and Commissioner (Appeals) had
imposed penalty of 20%.Before the Commissioner
(Appeals) affidavits in support of the contention
that the assessee had received commission were
filed. Those affidavits were not considered. The
tribunal noted that the assessee had tried to
furnish evidence by way of affidavit and the same
was not considered. After having so said, the
tribunal without reversing the findings of the
Commissioner (Appeals) proceeded to held as under :
"After looking into the facts and
circumstances of the case we are of opinion
that there was an explanation offered by the
assessee though for the purpose of
assessment it was dismissed but the bonafide
of the assessee was very well established,
therefore, keeping in view the entirely of
the circumstances assessee deserves
relief....."
. The tribunal before reversing the order of the
Commissioner appeals ought to have given reasons for
considering the affidavit evidence and secondly as
to why it has accepted the said evidence. We do not
((-3-))
find any reasons given for the same. In the light
of that in our opinion, the impugned order will have
to be set aside and the matter remanded back to the
tribunal for reconsideration de novo and to pass a
fresh orders according to law.
. With the above observations, appeal dismissed
off.
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, 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.