Gujarat High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 vs Idar Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd., on 27 February, 2018
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi, B.N. Karia
C/TAXAP/59/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL NO. 59 of 2018
==========================================================
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2
Versus
IDAR NAGARIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,
==========================================================
Appearance:
MRS MAUNA M BHATT for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
Date : 27/02/2018
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. Revenue is in appeal against the judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 17.08.2017 raising following questions for our consideration:
"1.Whether the Appellate Tribunal had erred in law and on facts in upholding the order of the CIT(A) deleting the penalty of Rs. 30,27,378/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act?
2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the claim made by the assessee in its return of income was wholly unsustainable in law and further, the assessee was unable to prove its bona fides in making such claims?
3. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law by accepting the contention of the assessee that all claims howsoever untenable cannot be made subject matter of penalty proceedings?Page 1 of 2
C/TAXAP/59/2018 ORDER
4. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law by not applying the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of CIT vs. Zoom Communication (P) Ltd. [(2015) 57 Taxmann.com 389]; the later decision confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as (2016) 70 Taxmann.com 37?"
2. The issue pertains to penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act which was deleted by the Commissioner and confirmed by the Tribunal. Commissioner as well as the Tribunal were of the opinion that the assessee had given all particulars regarding the claim of deduction in the return. Merely because the claim was not admissible would not lead to automatic penalty. The Tribunal further noted that the co-operative banks were enjoying exemption from the provisions of income tax till assessment year 2007-08. It was only in the year 2007-08, the income became taxable. Inter alia on such ground, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal.
3. We see no question of law arises. Tax Appeal is dismissed.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (B.N. KARIA, J.) JYOTI V. JANI Page 2 of 2