Pr CIT vs. Shree Gopal Housing & Plantation Corporation (Bombay High Court)- 12 Feb 2018
Some of the important discussions/ pointers of the case for easy reference:-
1- ....Further, the Tribunal held that the disallowance of claim of deduction which has been made bonafide would not by itself lead to penalty. Therefore, each appeal in respect of the order deleting / imposing a penalty by the Tribunal would have to be considered in relation to the facts arising therein and also in the quantum proceedings....
2- .....It cannot be said as a matter of rule that in case where this Court admits an appeal relating to quantum proceedings ipso facto i.e. without anything more, the penalty order get vitiated. Thus, the question of entertaining an appeal from an order imposing / deleting penalty would have to be decided on a case to case basis......
3- It cannot be said as a matter of rule that in case where this Court admits an appeal relating to quantum proceedings ipso facto i.e. without anything more, the penalty order get vitiated. Thus, the question of entertaining an appeal from an order imposing / deleting penalty would have to be decided on a case to case basis.
4-......... It cannot be said as a matter of rule that in case where this Court admits an appeal relating to quantum proceedings ipso facto i.e. without anything more, the penalty order get vitiated. Thus, the question of entertaining an appeal from an order imposing / deleting penalty would have to be decided on a case to case basis. ...
For reading full text of the case please refer link - http://itatonline.org/archives/pr-cit-vs-shree-gopal-housing-plantation-corporation-bombay-high-court-s-2711c-penalty-the-law-in-nayan-builders-368-itr-722-bom-does-not-mean-as-a-matter-of-rule-that-in-case-where-the-high-c/shree-gopal-housing-penalty-271-1-c/
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Some of the important discussions/ pointers of the case for easy reference:-
1- ....Further, the Tribunal held that the disallowance of claim of deduction which has been made bonafide would not by itself lead to penalty. Therefore, each appeal in respect of the order deleting / imposing a penalty by the Tribunal would have to be considered in relation to the facts arising therein and also in the quantum proceedings....
2- .....It cannot be said as a matter of rule that in case where this Court admits an appeal relating to quantum proceedings ipso facto i.e. without anything more, the penalty order get vitiated. Thus, the question of entertaining an appeal from an order imposing / deleting penalty would have to be decided on a case to case basis......
3- It cannot be said as a matter of rule that in case where this Court admits an appeal relating to quantum proceedings ipso facto i.e. without anything more, the penalty order get vitiated. Thus, the question of entertaining an appeal from an order imposing / deleting penalty would have to be decided on a case to case basis.
4-......... It cannot be said as a matter of rule that in case where this Court admits an appeal relating to quantum proceedings ipso facto i.e. without anything more, the penalty order get vitiated. Thus, the question of entertaining an appeal from an order imposing / deleting penalty would have to be decided on a case to case basis. ...
For reading full text of the case please refer link - http://itatonline.org/archives/pr-cit-vs-shree-gopal-housing-plantation-corporation-bombay-high-court-s-2711c-penalty-the-law-in-nayan-builders-368-itr-722-bom-does-not-mean-as-a-matter-of-rule-that-in-case-where-the-high-c/shree-gopal-housing-penalty-271-1-c/
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment