IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL C.O. NO. 126(DEL)/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1093(DEL)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996-97 SHRI U.K. BOSE, ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, VS. TAX, CEN TRAL CIRCLE 6, NEW DELHI. ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI DINESH VERMA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI N.K. CHAND, SR. DR ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM IN THIS CROSS OBJECTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED TWO GROUNDS TO THE EFFECT THAT SINCE THERE IS NO CONCEALMENT OF INCO ME OR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME, THE LD. CIT(APP EALS) IS JUSTIFIED IN CANCELING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF TH E INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THIS CROSS OBJECTION, IT HAS BEEN FAIRLY STATED BY THE LD . COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THESE GROUNDS, IN DEFENCE OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), CAN BE AGITATED AND ARGUED IN THE COURSE OF HEARIN G OF THE APPEAL OF THE C.O. NO. 126(DEL)/2010 2 REVENUE. THEREFORE, IT HAS BEEN CONCEDED THAT THIS CROSS OBJECTION IS INFRUCTUOUS IN NATURE. THE LD. DR ALSO FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY UNDER THE LAW TO TAKE UP THESE GR OUNDS IN DEFENCE OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). IN VIEW OF THIS, THE OBJECTION IS HELD TO BE INFRUCTUOUS AND, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 3. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.07.2010 SOON AFTER THE COMPLETING OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- (C.L. SETHI) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF ORDER: 22ND JULY, 2010. SP SATIA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- SHRI U.K. BOSE, ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI. CIT(A) CIT THE DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.