1999 (7) TMI 22

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd Rs. 1,00,000 for the assessment year 1986-87 for not filing the audit report. The assessee took appeal against this before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and showed that the audit report was filed and that the requirement of filing the audit report was brought into force by the Finance Act, 1988, from April 1, 1989, and thus, was not attracted to the case. The Commissioner of Income-t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the penalty of Rs. 32,880 levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271B by holding that the order levying the penalty is barred by limitation? Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the penalty of Rs. 1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s for years. It serves the interest of none. It is high time that the Revenue authorities indulged in self-introspection and realised the need for developing a "tax friendly" culture. It is hoped that they would change with the times and exercise due application of mind in contesting litigation against taxpayers. This application is frivolous and is accordingly rejected. The Registrar is directe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X