75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

April 2016

Penalty –Assessee having already paid tax and interest u/s. 201 (1) and (1A) so as to end the dispute with the Revenue, the deletion of penalty levied u/s. 271C did not give rise to any substantial question of law.

By Kishore Karia Chartered Accountant Atul Jasani Advocate
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia [2016] 380 ITR 550 (SC)

The Tribunal after noting the case of the assessee that it had already paid the tax and interest u/s. 201(1) and (1A) so as to end the dispute with Revenue deleted the penalty levied u/s. 271C following the decision of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Itochu Corporation [2004] 268 ITR 172 (Del) and CIT vs. Mitsui and Co. Ltd. [2005] 272 ITR 545 (Del).

The High Court rejected the appeal of the Revenue on the ground that no substantial question of law, arose in the matter.

On further appeal, Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the Revenue holding that there was no substantial question of law, the facts and law having properly and correctly been assessed and appreciated by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as by the Income- Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

Section 263 – An Analysis

Deduction u/s 80-IB(10) – Delay in Receipt of Completion Certificate