AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
J.P. Devadhar, J.—Heard Mr. Anad Parchure, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr. K.P. Devani, learned Counsel for the respondent.
These two applications are filed by the Revenue u/s 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Tribunal dated 25/01/1994 in R.A. Nos. 129 & 130/Nag/94 declining to refer the following questions of law for the opinion of this Court.:
(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the CIT (A) Nagpur was justified in cancelling the penalty so imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by the Assessing Officer
(2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the amounts were offered only to buy peace and avoid litigation and does not represent the concealed income of the assessee
The assessment years involved herein are; 1985-86 and 1986-87.
The dispute in these two applications pertains to deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The penalty levied in I.T. Application No. 1 of 1995 is Rs. 50,000/- and in I.T. Application No. 3 of 1995 is Rs. 15,000/-. Since the tax effect in both these applications are only Rs. 65,000/-, in the light of the decision of this Court in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pithwa Engg. Works, , in our opinion, this is not a fit case for calling statement of the case.
Accordingly, both the applications are dismissed. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.