TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ases, the admission of appeal in quantum proceedings would indicate that an appeal against deletion of penalty on the above account will also warrant admission. In the penalty appeal, it would not be appropriate to widen the scope of controversy in the quantum appeal which after hearing the parties had not admitted it on this question as it was not insisted upon at the hearing of the appeal in the quantum proceedings. This appears to be so, as otherwise, we would have dealt with this question at that time as we are now dealing with it, as the Revenue insists on this question. Considerations for imposition of penalty are undoubtedly different from considerations which would come into play while deciding the appeal in quantum proceeding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer on account of unaccounted cash receipts on sale of plots? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer, on addition as endorsed by the CIT(A), that the amount of ₹ 1 crore was the assessee's undisclosed income, without appreciating that by doing so that the Tribunal has contradicted ins own findings in the case of the partners, since in the case of the partners, the Tribunal has itself endorsed the disclosure of the impugned amount of ₹ 1 crore a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... substantial question of law, evidences that the issue is debatable. Thus, not warranting any penalty. 4. We find that the decision of this Court in Nayan Builders (supra) upholding the order of the Tribunal proceeded on the basis that no case was made out for imposition of penalty and the same was rightly set aside by the Tribunal. Further, the order of the Tribunal against which the above appeal in Nayan Builders (supra) was filed by the Revenue, clearly records the fact that the issues which arose in the quantum proceedings related to a bona fide claim of deduction under the Act. 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 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. Regarding question no.(i) and (ii) : (a) In the present facts, we note that the impugned order of the Tribunal has deleted the penalty only because in the order dated 7th November, 2014 in the quantum proceedings the additions have also been deleted. The appeal by the Revenue from the order of the Tribunal dated 7th November, 2014 has been admitted by us on 12th December, 2017 being Income Tax Appeal No.536 of 2015 (Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Shree Gopal Housing and Plantation Corporation) on question nos. (i) and (ii) herein. (b) However, the questions on which the quantum appeal has been admitted are not in respect of claim for deduction and / or pure interpretation of law and / or document which could lead to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns which would come into play while deciding the appeal in quantum proceedings. In case, if the respondent assessee succeeds in the quantum proceedings, no occasion to impose penalty upon the assessee can arise. However, in case the Revenue succeeds in the quantum proceedings, then that by itself will not necessarily invite penalty. It would still be open to the respondent assessee to urge that in the facts and circumstances of the case, no penalty is imposable. 9. Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Tribunal. This would enable the Tribunal to keep the papers and proceedings relating to the present appeal available, to be produced when sought for by the Court. 10. To be heard along with Income Tax Appeal No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
