2009 (2) TMI 2

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... held that the liability in respect of first two item had infact being incurred, no penalty can be imposed - in respect of third item accepting the contention of the assessee that the lapse was not deliberate, no penalty ought to have been imposed - 39 OF 1992 - - - Dated:- 5-2-2009 - F.I.Rebello R.S.Mohite, JJ JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by R.S. Mohite, J - Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (ii) Disallowance of claim of liability on account of L/C opened with UBI Rs.28,89,093/- (iii) Disallowance of fine in lieu of confiscation of goods paid Rs.14,25,000/- 4. As far as item no.(i) which pertains to disallowance of claim of a liability on account of L/C opened with Andhra Bank to the tune of Rs.9,75,876/-, our attention is drawn to the fact that this Court in ITR No.38 of 1989, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of this Court in ITRNo.38/89. In the circumstances, in our view, no penalty can be imposed in respect of this item under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income-tax Act. 6. In so far as item no.(iii) is concerned, it appears that the disallowance of fine was made by an order passed by Govt. of India on 20.3.1980. It is a factually accepted position that this order was received by the assessee in Apr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X