CIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S NUWARE INDIA LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the Revenue's appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Act against the ITAT's order for assessment year 1995-96. The ITAT had deleted the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) by relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT. However, the Revenue argued that this judgment had been overruled by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. The High Court observed that this fact was not disputed by the assessee's counsel. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the ITAT, and remanded the matter back to the ITAT for a fresh decision in accordance with the law. The parties were directed to appear before the ITAT on 7.12.2009. No issue was expressly left undecided.
What were the facts?
The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench. The ITAT had dismissed the Revenue's appeal for assessment year 1995-96, upholding the deletion of penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee, M/s Nuware India Ltd., had declared a loss, but additions were made by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) had deleted the penalty, which was then confirmed by the ITAT, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT. The Revenue contended that the Supreme Court's decision in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. had been overruled by a later decision in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is justified in holding that the judgment in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd v. CIT, 290-ITR 83 (SC) will apply even after the insertion of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1.4.1976? (Question of law) 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is right in deleting the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the total income of the assessee has been assessed at a loss figure? (Question of mixed law and fact) 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in confirming the deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)c) by relying on the Apex Court decision in the case of Virtual Soft Systems Ltd., (189-ITR-83) as the issue has now been finally resolved by the larger bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision dated 18.8.2008 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. [(2008) 218 CTR (SC) 359]? (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's contentions: The ITAT was not justified in relying on the judgment in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT, as it had been overruled by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. The tax effect involved is Rs. 10,70,000/-, exceeding the monetary limits for filing appeals.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA No. 973 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 31.7.2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ......Appellant Vs. M/s Nuware India Ltd., 20/6, Mathura Road, Faridabad. ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY PRESENT: Mr.Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Vibhav Jain, Advocate, for respondent. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) The revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( for short, “the Act”) against the order dated 7.12.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench”H” Delhi in ITA No. 1960 (DEL) of 2007 for the assessment year 1995-96, proposing to raise the following substantial questions of law: A “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is justified in holding that the judgment in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd v. CIT, 290-ITR 83 (SC) will apply eve after insertion of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1.4.1976?” B “ Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is right in -2- deleting the penalty imposed under Section 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the total income of the assessee has been assessed at a loss figure?” C “ Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in confirming the deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)c) by relying on the Apex Court decision in the case of Virtual Soft Systems Ltd., (189-ITR-83) as the issue has now been finally resolved by the larger bench of the Hon'ble Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. [(2008) 218 CTR (SC) 359]?” D That the tax effect involved in this cae is Rs.10,70,000/- , which is more than the monetary limits prescribed by the DBDT in instruction No. 5 of 2008 dated 15.5.2008 issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act for filing appeal before the Hon'ble High Court.” The assessee declared loss but during assessment, the Assessing Officer did not accept the extent of loss claimed and addition was made to the income. Proceedings were also initiated for penalty. Finally, penalty was levied. On appeal, CIT(A) deleted the penalty while -3- upholding the addition. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd v. CIT (2007) 289 ITR 83. It is stated that the judgment relied upon by the Tribunal has been overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt Ltd., (2008) 304 ITR 308. This is not disputed by learned counsel for the assessee. In view of the above, this appeal is allowed. The order of the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal for further proceedings on 7.12.2009. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE (DAYA CHAUDHARY) July 31, 2009
JUDGE raghav Note: Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter? ........Yes/No -4-
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026