Punjab-Haryana High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shri Munim on 5 January, 2011
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, Ajay Kumar Mittal
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA No. 50 of 2008
Date of Decision: 5.1.2011
Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad
....Appellant.
Versus
Shri Munim
...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.
PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate with
Ms. Jyoti, Advocate for the respondent,
in ITA Nos. 50, 222 and 249 of 2008.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
1. This order will dispose of ITA Nos. 50, 222, 249, 311 to 313, 334, 336 and 379 of 2008 as it has been stated by learned counsel for the revenue that common questions of law are involved in the appeals.
2. ITA No.50 of 2008 has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1941 against order dated 18.4.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "G", Delhi (in short "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 04(Del)2006, for the assessment year 1997-98, claiming following substantial questions of law:-
"a. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ITA No. 50 of 2008 -2- case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in confirming the order of the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the penalties levied by Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) in contravention of the order of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M. Sajjanraj Nahar Vs. CIT (283 ITR 230), is correct when the Assessing Officer had recorded initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) in the assessment order?
b. That the Hon'ble ITAT erred in deciding that providing contumacious intent is an essential ingredient in levy of penalty in contravention 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?
c. That the order of the Hon'ble ITAT is in contravention of the many judicial pronouncements including Thirupathy Kumar Khemka Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 210 CTR 287 (Mad)?"
3. The assessee received compensation under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in view of acquisition of his land for public purpose. Enhanced compensation was subjected to tax as capital gain and in addition penalty was also levied. The CIT(A) set aside the levy of penalty holding that the assessee had not concealed the particulars of income but had only taken a bonafide plea that the disbursement of ITA No. 50 of 2008 -3- enhanced compensation had not become final. The Tribunal upheld the view of the CIT(A). The Tribunal also observed that the Assessing Officer had failed to record satisfaction for levy of penalty as required under the law.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the revenue submits that satisfaction was properly recorded and in this regard the contention of the revenue is supported by the view taken by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Pearay Lal and Sons, [2009] 308 ITR 438. However, she fairly states that the plea of the assessee being debatable as to the year in which the income was to be taxed, the setting aside of penalty was upheld in similar circumstances by this Court vide judgment dated 15.7.2010 in ITA No. 16 of 2010 [The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Fateh Singh (HUF)].
6. In view of the fact that setting aside of penalty has already been upheld in similar cases, referred to above, even if question (a) claimed by the revenue is to be answered in its favour, questions (b) and (c) have to be answered against the revenue and the appeals have to be dismissed.
7. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -4-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 222 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Munim ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate with Ms. Jyoti, Advocate for the respondent. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -5-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 249 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Munim ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate with Ms. Jyoti, Advocate for the respondent. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -6-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 311 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Trilok Singh ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -7-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 312 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Trilok Singh ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -8-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 313 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Trilok Singh ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -9-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 334 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Satyavir Singh (HUF) ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -10-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 336 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Satyavir Singh (HUF) ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
ITA No. 50 of 2008 -11-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 379 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant.
Versus Shri Satyavir Singh (HUF) ...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
For orders, see ITA No. 50 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shri Munim).
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE
January 5, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE