Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Vijay Bhagwandas Raheja vs Dy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cnetral ... on 29 January, 2020

Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, Milind N. Jadhav

                                                                                       9. os itxa 1370-17.doc

R.M. AMBERKAR
(Private Secretary)

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                            O.O.C.J.

                                     INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1370 OF 2017


                      Vijay Bhagwandas Raheja                                  ..   Appellant

                                     Versus
                      Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-29 & Anr. ..   Respondents

                                               ...................
                       Mr. K Gopal a/w Satendra Pandey for the Appellant
                                                         ...................

                                                CORAM         : UJJAL BHUYAN &
                                                                  MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.
                                                 DATE        :    JANUARY 29, 2020.

                      P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. K. Gopal, learned counsel for the appellant.

2. Let notice on admission be issued on the following proposed substantial questions of law:-

(i) Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in reversing the order passed by the CIT(A) and thereby confirming the levy of concealment penalty?
(ii) Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in upholding the action of respondent No. 1 in levying concealment penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the addition made on account of mistake in treating the income from transfer of depreciable asset as long term capital gain instead of short term capital gain as per provisions of Section 50 of the 1 of 2
9. os itxa 1370-17.doc Act?

(iii) Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in confirming the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act without appreciating that appellant has neither concealed any particulars of income nor furnished any inaccurate particulars of income?

3. Appellant to serve the respondent by hand delivery and to file affidavit of service

4. Notice to indicate that an endeavour may be made to dispose of the appeal at the admission stage.

5. S.O to 23.3.2020.





           [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]                          [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ]

            Digitally
            signed by
Ravindra    Ravindra M.
            Amberkar
M.          Date:
Amberkar    2020.01.30
            11:02:32
            +0530




                                                                                        2 of 2