| COURT: | Bombay High Court |
| CORAM: | Akil Kureshi J, Sarang V. Kotwal J |
| SECTION(S): | 260A, 271(1)(c) |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | concelment Penalty, debatable issue |
| COUNSEL: | Sean Wassodew |
| DATE: | March 19, 2019 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | March 29, 2019 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2006-07 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 271(1)(c) Penalty: Merely because the High Court has admitted the Appeal and framed substantial questions of law, it cannot be said that the entire issue is debatable one and under no circumstances, penalty could be imposed (CIT vs. Dharamshi B. Shah 366 ITR 140 (Guj) followed) | |
Admission of a tax appeal by the High Court, in majority cases, is ex parte and without recording even prima facie reasons. Whether ex parte or after by-parte hearing, unless some other intention clearly emerges from the order itself, admission of a tax appeal by the High Court only indicates the court’s opinion that the issue presented before it required further consideration. It is an indication of the opinion of the High Court that there is a prima facie case made out and the questions are required to be decided after admission. Mere admission of an appeal by the High Court cannot without there being anything further, be an indication that the issue is debatable one so as to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act
Recent Comments