COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. HARSH TALWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was admitted on the substantial question of law whether the ITAT was correct in law in deleting the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The aforesaid issue has arisen for consideration in the following factual backdrop.

(2.) It is clear from the above that the CIT (A) also commented upon the wrong approach adopted by the AO and further that the AO had not made out a case that the Assessee had claimed any fictitious expenses on the basis of any incriminating evidences. It was now the turn of the Revenue to feel aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the CIT (A) in deleting the penalty which prompted the Revenue to challenge the said order by preferring appeal before the ITAT. However, the attempt of the Revenue in seeking to get the order of the CIT (A) has failed, inasmuch as, vide impugned order dated 16th October, 2009 the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and upheld the order of the CIT (A). The position is summarized as under by the ITAT in the impugned order:

(3.) Apart from what is recorded by the CIT (A), another additional aspect which the Tribunal has pointed out is that even in the case of the partnership firm of M/s Gallaria June 1st, wherein the Assessee is a partner, similar penalty under identical circumstances imposed by the Revenue had been deleted by the ITAT. We may further add that the said order in respect of the partnership firm has been accepted by the Revenue and no appeal preferred there against.