TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d thereby setting aside the assessment order itself. It is in this backdrop, a question has arisen as to whether the penalty order, which was passed on the basis of original assessment order and when that assessment order had been set aside, could still survive. The Tribunal as well as the High Court has held that it could not be so for the simple reason that when the original assessment order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1-2015 - A. K. Sikri And Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. K. Radha Krishna, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mr. Gargi Khanna, Adv. Ms. Anil Katyar, Adv. Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, Adv For the Respondent : Mr. Harpreet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Adv. For M/s. K. J. John Co ORDER In these appeals, we are concerned with the question as to whether penalty proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 269SS of the Act and because of this the Assessing Officer was satisfied that penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act were to be initiated. The assessee carried out this order in appeal. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal and set aside the assessment order with a direction to frame the assessment de novo after affording adequate opportunity to the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal as well as the High Court has held that it could not be so for the simple reason that when the original assessment order itself was set aside, the satisfaction recorded therein for the purpose of initiation of the penalty proceeding under Section 271E would also not survive. This according to us is the correct proposition of law stated by the High Court in the impugned order. As point ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
