Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS Respondent: SOCIETY HOSIERY FACTORY
Court Name: Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge(s): S. S. Sodhi, Gokal Chand Mital Title: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs SOCIETY HOSIERY FACTORY Case No.: Income-tax Reference No. 207 of 1980 Date of Judgment:1988-11-21 Reported As: 1991 PTD 155 Result: Order accordingly
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT S.S. SODHI, J.---The question of law referred for the opinion of this Court is as under:-- "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was not legally competent to pass the penalty order after April 1, 1976?" The matter raised here is covered by the reasoning as set forth in the judgment of this Court in CIT v. Mela Ram Jagdish Raj & Co. (1981) 132 ITR 897, which was later affirmed by the Full Bunch of this Court in CIT v. Mohinder Lal (1987) 168 ITR 101. Following these judgments, the reference is answered in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.