9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that proving contumacious intent is an essential ingredient in levy of penalty – revenue appeal dismissed - 611 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 11-2-2008 - SATISH KUMAR MITTAL and RAKESH KUMAR GARG JJ. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant-revenue. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Rakesh Kumar Garg, J . - 1. The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in levy of penalty in contravenetion of the provisions of a Civil Statute like Income Tax Act in spite of there being so many judgments that breach of a Civil obligation attracts levy of penalty whether the contravention was made by the defaulter with any guilty intention or not? 3. That the order of the Hon'ble ITAT is in contravention of the many judicial pronouncements including Thirupath ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment years 1994-95 to 1996-97. The assessee received interest for the assessment year 1995-96 which worked out to Rs.3,33,710/- but no return of income was filed, therefore, proceedings under Sections 147/148 were initiated of the Income Tax Act. (iii) In response to notice under Section 148, the assessee did not file his return of income. The interest income of Rs.3,33,710/- on the en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld the findings of the Assessing Officer and had confirmed addition of Rs.3,33,701/- on account of interest on enhanced compensation, a show cause notice dated 13.1.2005 was issued to the asseessee fixing the penalty proceedings for hearing on 10.2.2005. None appeared on behalf of the respondent-assessee on the fixed date. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-I(3), Faridabad vide his order dated 28.2.2005 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 17.10.2005 whereby he cancelled the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271 (1)(c ) of the Act. The said appeal of the revenue was dismissed by the Tribunal. 5. Mr. Yogesh Putney, counsel for the revenue, has very fairly stated that Income Tax Appeal Nos.582 and 586 of 2007 involving similar questions of law and fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
