2013 (10) TMI 158

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ainst the order of assessment being D.B.Income Tax Appeal No. 167/2010 came to be dismissed by this Court vide judgment dt. 18th August, 2010 reported in [2011] 33 ITR 174 (Raj) : (CIT, Jaipur-III, Jaipur Vs. M/s.Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Shrimadhopur, District Sikar). As it reveals from the record, the assessment order was initially passed by the assessing authority on 11th December, 2006 and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cordance with the provisions of the Act considered the order of CIT (Appeals) and proceeded with penalty proceedings U/s.271(l)(c) and imposed penalty on the basis of additions sustained by CIT (Appeals) vide order dt.26th February, 2007. However, an appeal came to be preferred by the assessee before the CIT (Appeals) who vide order dt.l8th November, 2008 cancelled the penalty observing that the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ferred by the revenue have been dismissed, the present appeal preferred against the order of ITAT on account of these changed circumstances, does not hold any merit. However, the ITAT itself while dismissing the appeal vide order dt.20th March, 2009 granted liberty to the department to initiate fresh penalty proceedings U/s.271(l)(c) of the Act in case they succeed in appeal before the High Court .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X