9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was delivered by RAKESH KUMAR GARG J.— 1. The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the order dated April 19, 2007, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "H", New Delhi, in I. T. A. No. 328/Delhi of 2006 in the case of the respondent/assessee for the assessment year 1998-99 raising the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1) (c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, whereas it had already confirmed the addition made under section 45(5) of the Income-tax Act on account of enhanced compensation received during the previous year relating to the assessment year 1998-99 ? (ii) Whether, on the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... culars of his income amounting to Rs.10,57,180 for the assessment year1998-99 and, therefore, the assessee is liable to pay penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, equal to 100 per cent. of tax sought to be evaded. 5. The appeal field by the assessee against the order of the penalty proceedings was accepted by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Faridabad, vide his order dated November 25, 2005. 6. While allowing the appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the taxability of the enhanced compensation and interest thereon is the matter of litigation and the issue has not been finally settled and therefore, there was a bona fide belief on the part of the appellant that this income could not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch as two views were clearly possible on the said issue as is apparent from the decisions of the various High Courts as well as of the hon'ble Supreme Court of India and the claim of the assessee was on this issue thus was based on one possible view and although the said claim was not accepted in the quantum proceedings on a difference of opinion, we are of the view that making of such claim bona fide on the basis of a possible view could not be treated as concealment of its income by the assessee or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income so as to attract the penal provisions of section 271(1) (c) of the Income-tax Act. The said finding of fact has been given by the Tribunal after perusing the relevant material on record and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
