CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2000) 07 DEL CK 0146

Commissioner of Income Tax vs Smt. Prem Lata Bajpai

Delhi High Court · Decided on 3 July 2000 · Citation: (2000) 5 AD 224 : (2000) 86 DLT 559 : (2000) 56 DRJ 564 : (2000) 111 TAXMAN 691

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, C.J · D.K. Jain, J
CASE NUMBER
Income Tax R. No. 337 of 1982

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 336 words

Arijit Pasayat, C.J.—Heard.

At the instance of Revenue, u/s 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench-B (for short the Tribunal) has referred following question for opinion of this Court:

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct in deleting the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- levied by the IAC u/s 271(1)(c)?"

2.

Factual position in a nutshell is as follows :

For the assessment year 1973-74, assessed filed its return of income on 16th August, 1973 disclosing income of Rs. 19,887/-. By a revised return, filed on 29th September, 1976 it was shown at Rs. 47,834/- which included Rs. 10,000/- on account of shares allotted otherwise than for cash in Doburg Lager Breweries Private Limited. Assessing Officer treated the sum of Rs. 10,000/- as income from undisclosed sources and initiated penalty proceedings. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC for short) levied penalty of Rs. 10,000/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by order dated 29th August, 1978. Same was challenged before Tribunal by assessee. Tribunal held that the IAC had no jurisdiction to impose the penalty, by its order dated 28th January, 1981. No decision was rendered on other grounds. Subsequently, an application was filed by the assessee, which was treated as miscellaneous, petition, with the request for taking up the case on merits also. By order dated 27th February, 1982 the Tribunal disposed of that application and decided the other grounds in favor of the assessee.

3.

In view of the factual position highlighted above and decision of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Orissa Vs. Dhadi Sahu, , the Tribunal was right in holding that the IAC did not have jurisdiction to impose penalty. That being the position there is no necessity for deciding the question as to whether on merits also the assessed was entitled to any relief. The question is accordingly answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favor of the assessed and against the Revenue.