High Court Of Delhi
CIT vs. Bishamber Dayal & Co.
Sections 271(1)(c), 274(2)
Asst. Year 1972-73, 1973-74
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. & D.K. Jain, J.
IT Ref. Nos. 341 & 342 of 1980
8th December, 2000
R.C. Pandey with Ajay Jha & Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, for the Revenue : S.K. Aggarwal, for the Assessee
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. :
This judgment will govern IT References Nos. 341 and 342 of 1980.
2. Heard. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal, Delhi Bench-D (in short “the Tribunal”), has referred under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), the following question, common to both references, for the opinion of this Court :
“Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in cancelling the penalties levied by the IAC on 31st July, 1976, against the assessee for the asst. yrs. 1972-73 and 1973-74 under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, as without jurisdiction?”
3. The assessment years involved are 1972-73 and 1973-74. It is the undisputed position that fresh order of assessments after reopening of the assessments which were earlier made ex parte were completed on 30th April, 1976. Obviously reference was made to the IAC (in short “the IAC”), and penalties were imposed on 31st July,1976. By virtue of an amendment to s. 274 of the Act, by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, whereby sub-s. (2) was deleted, the IAC lost jurisdiction to impose penalty. What would be the effect if the reference was made earlier to 1st April, 1976, is not the question here. Therefore, when the reference was made the IAC had been divested of his jurisdiction to impose penalty. That being the position, the Tribunal was justified in its conclusion. The answer to the question referred, therefore, is in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The references stand disposed of.
[Citation : 255 ITR 343]