COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MANAKCHAND
1999 P T D 1558
[226 I T R 959]
[Rajasthan High Court (India)]
Before B. R. Arora and P.C. Jain, JJ
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Versus
MANAKCHAND
D.B. I.T. Reference Application No.131 of 1995, decided on 12/01/1996.
Income-tax---
----Reference---Penalty---Delay in filing returns---No tax payable on amount returned---Tribunal was justified in holding that no penalty could be imposed under S.271(1)(a)---No question of law arises---Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.256 & 271(1)(a).
Held, dismissing the application for reference, that the Tribunal was right in holding that penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, could not be imposed according to the provisions of law as no tax was payable on the returned income of the assessee. No question of law arose from its order.
CIT v. Builders Engineers Co. (1989) 175 ITR 317 (Raj.) ref.
Sandeep Bhandawat for Applicant.
JUDGMENT
The Revenue has moved this application under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), with the prayer that the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, may be directed to refer the following question for the opinion of this Court.
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in not deciding the issue raised in the grounds of appeal and in upholding the cancellation of penalty of Rs.25,237 revised under section 271(1)(a) on the other grounds that no tax was payable after the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the quantum appeal whereas the order of the Tribunal is sub judice before the High Court under section 256(2)?"
An application under section 256(1) of the Act was moved before the Tribunal with the prayer that the above noted question may be referred for the opinion of the High Court. The Tribunal dismissed that application filed by the Revenue on the ground that no referable question of law arises in the matter because while deciding the appeal, the Tribunal was of the opinion that penalty under section 271(1)(a) could not be imposed according to the provisions of law as no tax was payable on the returned income of the assessee. The Tribunal. therefore, upheld the cancellation of the penalty. The Tribunal was also of the view that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Builders Engineers' Co. (1989) 175 ITR 317.
We are also of the view that for the reasons stated in the order no referable question of law arises in this matter.
The application under section 256(2) of the Act, is, therefore, dismissed.
M.B.A.1979/FC Appeal dismissed.