M/S ACID & CHEMICALS CO V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 12(2)

TAXAP/1924/2010

AI Insights

The case involves M/S Acid & Chemicals Co appealing against the Income Tax Officer, Ward 12(2), concerning penalties and additions under Section 271(1)(c) and Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The core legal questions pertained to the validity of the penalty upheld by the Tribunal and the circumstances under which the cash credit was generated, spanning from 1987 to 2000. The appellant's counsel indicated a desire to avail the benefits under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, which led to the request for withdrawal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 749539 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Section 271(1)(c), Section 68
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MANISH BHATT
• Assessee Lawyers: KETAN SHAH
• Keywords: Cash credit; Penalty; Tax appeal; Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme
• Section: 271(1)(c); 68

Judgement Text

"C/TAXAP/1924/2010 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1924 of 2010 ========================================================== M/S ACID & CHEMICALS CO Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 12(2) ========================================================== Appearance: MR KETAN H SHAH(2705) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 LD SR ADV. MR.MANISH BHATT for the Opponent(s) No.1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Date : 28/10/2021 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) 1 . F o r c o n s i d e r i n g t h e s u b s t a n t i a l q u e s t i o n o f l a w o n 2 5 . 0 1 . 2 0 1 2 , t h i s C o u r t h a s a d m i t t e d t h i s a p p e a l . F o l l o w i n g a r e t h e s u b s t a n t i a l q u e s t i o n o f l a w . “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) in respect of the addition of investment which it upheld under Section 68 in the hands of the assessee in assessment appeal? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of Page 1 of 3 C/TAXAP/1924/2010 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 the case the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the levy of penalty though one of the partners, whose statement was recorded,has stated that this cash credit is generated from the year 1987 to 2000?” 2 . L e a r n e d a d v o c a t e , M r . K e t a n S h a h s u b m i t s t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t i s d e s i r o u s o f a v a i l i n g t h e b e n e f i t o f V i v a d S e V i s h w a s S c h e m e a n d F o r m N o . 3 h a s a l r e a d y b e e n r e c e i v e d . O n c e h e w i t h d r a w s t h e p e n d i n g t a x a p p e a l , h e w i l l b e g i v e n t h e F o r m N o . 4 a n d t h e r e f o r e , t h e C o u r t m a y p e r m i t t o w i t h d r a w t h e p r e s e n t a p p e a l . 3 . A c c e d i n g t o t h e r e q u e s t , t h e T a x A p p e a l i s d i s p o s e d o f a s n o t p r e s s e d , w i t h o u t e n t e r i n g i n t o t h e m e r i t s a n d e x p r e s s i n g a n y o p i n i o n . 4 . I f f o r s o m e r e a s o n s t h e a p p e l l a n t i s Page 2 of 3 C/TAXAP/1924/2010 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 u n a b l e t o a v a i l t h e b e n e f i t o f t h e s c h e m e , i t s h a l l b e o p e n f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t t o t a k e l e g a l r e c o u r s e , a v a i l a b l e u n d e r t h e l a w . Sd/- (SONIA GOKANI, J) Sd/- (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 3 of 3 "