COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. SH. RAJAN KUMAR C/O M/S NAGESH KNITWEAR

PDF · subscribers
ITR/3/2006HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01075405200611 May 2016Author: MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN,MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the reference as not pressed, granting liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the reference if something survived. The Court clarified that the withdrawal of the reference by the revenue would not be taken as an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. The legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. Therefore, no decision was made on the substantial question of law regarding the deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c).

What were the facts?

This is a reference filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for the assessment year 1981-82. The ITAT had upheld the deletion of a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The respondent is Shri Rajan Kumar (assessee). The reference arises from RA No.101/Chandi/96, which stemmed from ITA No.514/Chandi/91. The revenue sought to challenge the ITAT's decision regarding the penalty deletion.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in upholding the deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961? The appellant-revenue, through its learned counsel, submitted that in view of Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 and Circular No. 279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it did not wish to press the present reference as the tax effect involved was less than ₹20 lacs. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the reference if something survived therein. No arguments were recorded for the respondent-assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 11.05.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar .......Appellant Versus Shri Rajan Kumar ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the appellant. RAJESH BINDAL,J. This reference has been filed in RA No.101/Chandi/96 arising out of I.T.A. No.514/Chandi/91, for the assessment year 1981-82, raising the following substantial question of law: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in upholding the deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c ) of the Income-tax Act, 1961? Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted that in view of circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 read with circular No.279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes, he does not wish to press the present reference as the tax effect involved is less than ` 20 lacs. However, he prays that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the REEMA SAINI 2016.05.18 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh -2- reference in case something survives therein. Dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. It is however, clarified that withdrawal of the reference by the revenue shall not be taken as affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. The legal issue as claimed by the revenue is left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. (RAJESH BINDAL)

JUDGE (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU) 11.05.2016 JUDGE reema REEMA SAINI 2016.05.18 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →