DEWA PROJECTOS PVT. LTD Vs. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, a builder challenges Ext.P4, an order passed by the appellate authority. By this order stay has been granted on condition that the petitioner will remit 1/3rd of the penalty levied on them.

(2.) CASE of the petitioner is that in the year 2007-08, they received payment of Rs.55 lakhs from their customers and that the payment was disclosed in the return filed for the year 2008-09. It is stated that disclosure of the turn over, at least in the succeeding year, proved that there was no intention to evade tax and therefore according the the counsel for the petitioner penalty could not have been imposed on them and that at best they could have been assessed for the previous year.

(3.) CASE of the petitioner is that having disclosed the turnover of Rs.55 lakhs in the return of 2008-09, even if an assessment for 2007-08 is possible, penalty could not have been levied. This contention does not appear to have been considered by the appellate authority. However, having considered this contention, prima facie, I am of the view that there is force in the argument. This apart, impugned order itself show that appellate authority also has found a prima facie case on passing a conditional order of stay.