9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated May 12, 2006, made in I. T. A. No. 1673/Mds/2002 for the assessment year 1996-97. The Revenue is the appellant. The issue raised in this appeal relates to the assessment year 1996-97. The assessee-company filed its return of income disclosing a loss of Rs. 3.59 crores. On completion of the assessment, the Assessing Officer reduced the loss to Rs. 87.93 lakhs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the total assessed income of the assessee was only a loss?" Mrs. Pushya Sitaraman, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the appellant fairly concedes that the issue raised in this appeal are already decided by this court in CIT v. A. Hariraman [2006] 282 ITR 607. It is trite law that the loss cannot be taken into account in co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and not a loss. Penalty could be imposed only in addition to the tax payable. A plain reading of clauses (ii) and (iii) in section 271(1)(c) of the Act, particularly in the context of the words 'in addition to tax, if any payable to him' employed in sub-clauses (ii) and (iii) would make it clear that the penalty contemplated in all the above clauses is a measure of tax payable by the assessee. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
