2019 (6) TMI 933

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the memorandum of the appeal is as under: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal has erred in holding that the penalty of Rs. 1,99,58,53,200/levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act does not survive, without appreciating the fact that the decision of this Hon'ble Court in respect of the quantum appeal has not attained finality, as the department has filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the same?" 2 The assessee before this Court is the 'Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation'. The assessee filed its return of income on 13th October 2010 showing deficit of Rs. 3,96,77,21,645/. The assessment order was passed under Section 143(3) of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was denied to the assessee, therefore, its income has increased which was considered by the AO for visiting the assessee with penalty. 5 Dissatisfied with the treatment given by the AO in the quantum proceedings, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has accepted the contentions of the assessee and held that it is a charitable institution. It is entitled for the benefit under section 11 and 12. Dissatisfied with the order of the Tribunal, Revenue went in appeal before the Hon'ble High Court. But Hon'ble High court has upheld view of the Tribunal and held that the assessee is a charitable institution and entitled for benefit under sections 11 and 12. On the strength of this order the Ld. counsel for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Revenue." 3 Thus, in view of the decision of this Court in the case of C.I.T. vs. G.I.D.C. 83 taxmann.com 366 (Gujarat), the assessee would be entitled for benefit under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. 4 Ms. Mauna Bhatt, the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that the decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. G.I.D.C. reported in [2017] 83 taxmann.com 366 (Tax Appeal No.381 of 2017) on which the Appellate Tribunal has placed reliance is a subject matter of challenge before the Supreme Court in S.L.P. (c) No.10390 of 2018. 5 We are of the view that the pendency of the S.L.P. before the Supreme Court by itself would not be the reason to admit this appeal. Since the quantum addition has b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X