2019 (3) TMI 1036 - HC - Income Tax

Initiation of prosecution - Penalty upheld by ITAT - substantial question of law relating to penalty u/s 271(1)(c) pending before High Court - Motion moved in pending appeal - Competent Authority has issued a show cause notice to the appellant why the prosecution should not be launched pursuant to such penalty order - HELD THAT - We are informed that the appellant has paid up the entire penalty in terms of the penalty order. Considering such fact and also considering the fact that the appeal against the penalty is admitted and the substantial question of law framed by the Court is pending for consideration, we stay the operation of the penalty order. Resultantly, at this stage, there would no question of launching prosecution. With these directions,Followed Motion is disposed of. Followed - SHRI SUPARAS D JAIN ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT (CORPORATE FINANCE) FOR DEEPAK FERTILIZERS AND PETROCHEMICALS CORPORATION LIMITED VERSUS ADDL CIT, RANGE3 (1)2017 (8) TMI 1508 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Summary

The Bombay High Court stayed the operation of a penalty order against the appellant assessee in an Income Tax Appeal, as the appellant had paid the penalty and the appeal was admitted with a substantial question of law framed. The Competent Authority issued a show cause notice regarding launching prosecution, but the Court disposed of the motion with directions to stay the penalty order.