CIT vs. ALLIED FINANCE PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . ITA 1309/2010 . . CIT ..... Appellant Through Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Adv. . versus . . ALLIED FINANCE PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through None . . . CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN . . O R D E R 30.08.2010 CM No. 15543/2010 . Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. . ITA No. 1309/2010 . Heard Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, learned counsel for the Revenue- appellant, on the question of admission. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 15.1.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench `A?, New Delhi) (for short ?the Tribunal?) in ITA No.1400-1401-Del/2009 pertaining to the assessment year 1998-99. ITA 1309/2010 page 1 of 3 The facts which are relevant to be stated are that for the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90, the assessing officer held that the letting of the property situated at Aurangzeb Lane by the assessee was not correct . The said matter was carried in appeal and the quantum appeal was decided against him. The assessing officer initiated proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that there has been furnishing of inaccurate particulars for the assessment year in question and imposed penalty. Being dissatisfied with the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) who affirmed the order passed by the assessing officer. Being grieved by the aforesaid order, the appeal was carried to the Tribunal and the Tribunal took note of the fact that the assessee in his explanation to the show cause issued in the penalty proceedings had stated that a litigation was going on with the Municipal Corporation of Delhi as regards the annual rateable value and, therefore, he furnished the figure and hence, it cannot be said that there was suppression of material facts or furnishing of inaccurate particulars or he has concealed any income. The learned counsel for the Revenue has taken us to paragraph 9 of the ITA 1309/2010 page 2 of 3 . . Tribunal?s order to highlight that the Tribunal had taken note of the fact that for the relevant assessment years suitable notes have been given. To appreciate the said submission, we carefully scrutinized the findings of the Tribunal which find place in paragraph 9 and on a proper scrutiny of the same, we find that the assessee had given a bona fide explanation and, therefore, the penalty proceedings was set aside. In our considered opinion, the Tribunal has accepted the explanation preferred by the assessee and in such acceptance, we do not see any perversity. In the result, we do not perceive any merit in the appeal and, accordingly, the same stands dismissed in limine. . . CHIEF JUSTICE . . . MANMOHAN, J . . AUGUST 30, 2010 aj . . . . . ITA 1309/2010 page 3 of 3 . 30