Case Law Details
PCIT Vs Harsh International Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court has upheld the deletion of the penalty on the ground i.e. the fact that appeals were admitted proved that the issue was debatable. The relevant portion of the orders in CIT Vs. Liquid Investment Ltd and CIT Vs. Thomson Press India Ltd is reproduced hereinbelow:-
A) Order dated 5th October, 2010 passed by this Court in CIT Vs. Liquid Investment Ltd. :-
“Both the CIT(A) as well as the ITAT have set aside the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the issue of deduction under Section 14A of the Act was a debatable issue. We may also note that against the quantum assessment where under deduction under Section 14A of the Act was prescribed to the assessee, the assessee has preferred an appeal in this Court under Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case.”
B) Order dated 3rd March, 2014 passed by this Court in CIT Vs. Thomson Press India Ltd :-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
