Case LawHigh Court › The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S Fideli...

The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S Fidelity Management & Research Co

High Court 12 Sep 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S Fidelity Management & Research Co
Date of order
12 Sep 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S Fidelity Management & Research Co, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: 1 In both these Appeals the common question of law raised by the Revenue is, whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Decision: In the result, 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

The order — as passed by the High Court

K IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.953 OF 2011 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 954 OF 2011 The Director of Income TaxVs.M/s Fidelity Management & Research Co. .. Appellant .. Respondent. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.Mr. A.K. Jasani for the Respondent. CORAM: J.P. DEVADHAR & K.K. TATED, JJ.DATE: 12TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1 In both these Appeals the common question of law raised by the Revenue is, whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2In the present case, the Assessee in its revised return of income has claimed that the income on sale of shares and securities was exempt. The claim of the Assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer and penalty was levied under section 271 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3The CIT (A) as also the ITAT have deleted the penalty on the ground that where the Assessee makes a wrong claim it does not amount to 7-8 ITXAL 953 954-11.doc furnishing inaccurate particulars so as to levy penalty under section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In our opinion, no fault can be found with the decision of the ITAT. In the result, both the Appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (K.K. TATED, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan