TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") is whether the Assessing Officer had recorded a valid satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. Learned counsel for the Revenue accepted the fact that this Court has taken the view in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ram Commercial Enterprises Ltd., [2000] 246 ITR 571 (Delhi) that the Assessing Officer must record his satisfaction in specific terms for initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. She also accepted the fact that the view taken by this Court in Ram Commercial Enterprises Ltd. has been approved by the Supreme Court in Dalip N. Shroff v. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, [2007] 291 ITR 519 (SC) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or for concealing the income. 8. There is nothing to suggest that the Assessing Officer applied his mind to the question about which facet of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is applicable to the case and for what act of omission or commission by the Assessee. The Assessee had filed its returns and had disclosed all material facts of the case and had concealed nothing in its returns. If the Assessing Officer takes a view contrary to that expressed by the Assessee, it does not per se mean that the Assessee has adopted an illegal device for reducing its tax liability. 9. Against the order imposing penalty, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on 1 st November, 2007). 12. Even though the law has been settled by this Court in a very large number of cases, apart from Ram Commercial Enterprises such as Diwan Enterprises v. Commercial of Income, [2000] 246 ITR 571 (Delhi) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. B.R. Sharma, [2005] 275 ITR 303, the Revenue is still filing these sort of appeals for no apparent reason. By this casual attitude of the Revenue, the Registry (apart from this Court) has been put under severe pressure in dealing with a large influx of appeals, which prima facie do not have any merit. By this flood of litigation, the Revenue is ensuring that more important cases, where stakes are much higher and where perhaps the Revenue has a better case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
