Kurian Joseph, J.— The short issue pertains to the assessment of penalty under Section 271-C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against the order of the assessing officer, the respondent took up the matter in appeal and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the levy of penalty.
2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31-3-2006 entered the following findings:
“11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax under Section 201(1) or compensatory interest under Section 201(1-A). The case of the assessee is that these amounts have already been paid so as to end the dispute with the Revenue. In the present appeals we are concerned with levy of penalty under Section 271-C for which it is necessary to establish that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts the Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty under Section 271-C in Itochu Corpn. 2004 SCC OnLine Del 369, (2004) 268 ITR 172 and in CIT v. Mitsui & Co. Ltd. 2004 SCC OnLine Del 1177, (2005) 272 ITR 545 Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of ITAT, Delhi in Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied under Section 271-C.”
3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The High Court rejected ITA No. 1521 of 2006 the appeal only on the ground that no substantial question of law arises in the matter.
4. On facts, we are convinced that there is no substantial question of law, the facts and law having properly and correctly been assessed and approached by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Thus, we see no merits in the appeal and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Comments