1980 (2) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... posed of by a common order for the sake of convenience. The said point is brought out in the relevant ground of appeal which is as below: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the provisions of s. 274(2) of the Act, the learned AAC erred in law in directing the ITO to compute the penalty leviable under s. 271(1)(a) subject to the maximum of 50 per cent of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... decisions reported at 105 ITR 518,, 108 ITR 439 and 110 ITR 84. The decision in the case of CIT vs. R. Ochhavlal Co.(1), related to a penalty imposed under s. 271(1)(c) and there was no occasion for the High Court to deal with the point which is at issue before us. Though the other two decisions related to penalties imposed on firms under s. 271(1)(a), the question referred to the High Court i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in support of the orders of the AAC involving the interpretation of the language of s. 271(1)(a)(i), but since for the reasons stated above, the departmental appeals must fail, we do not find it necessary to express an opinion on the said limb of his argument. 6. No other point was raised or pressed before us at the time of the hearing of these appeals. 7. The appeals are dismissed. - - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X