TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Revenue filing an appeal under Section 260A. However, he was unable to dispute that the wording of Section 275 (1) (a) as far as Commissioner of Income Tax and other officers was identical to the wording in both Section 158 (BFA)(3)(c) and Section 260 A of the Act. Consequently, the Court finds no error in the ITAT having followed the decision of this Court in Odeon Builders Private Limited to hold the penalty order in the present case to be barred by limitation. - Decided against revenue - ITA 1443/2018 - - - Dated:- 22-7-2019 - S. MURALIDHAR AND TALWANT SINGH JJ. Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing counsel Respondent Through: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Mr.Rohit Kumar Gupta Ms. Monika Ghai, Advoc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that in the context of Section 260A of the Act, the limitation period for filing an appeal against an order of the ITAT would begin to run immediately upon a copy of the order being received by the CIT (Judicial).This Court rejected the contention of the Revenue that till the concerned jurisdictional CIT received the order of the ITAT sought to be appealed against, limitation would not begin to run. In other words, the expression CIT in Section 260 A (1) of the Act was interpreted by this Court as meaning any CIT and not just the concerned CIT. 5. The decision of this Court in Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. (supra) was affirmed by the Supreme Court by dismissal of the Revenue s SLP (C) Diary No. 11792/2018 (Commissioner of I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ospective, that is, applicable only to those cases where the proceedings under Section 158 BFA (3) were initiated thereafter. 6. As far as the first submission is concerned, the Court finds that the expression received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner appearing in Section 158 BFA(3)(c) is identical to the expression in Section 260A (1) of the Act which was interpreted by this Court in Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. (supra) as any CIT and not necessarily the concerned CIT. In other words, for the purpose of Section 158BFA(3)(c) of the Act, if the order of the ITAT was received by the CIT (Judicial), the limitation of 6 months within which the penalty order had to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
