Case Law Details
DCIT (E) Vs Baroda Cricket Association (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Article 20(1) of the Constitution of India provides certain protection in this regard which states that no person can be convicted for any offence except for a violation of a law in force at the time of action charged an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of offence. Therefore, where the taxpayer complies with the law as actually existed at the earlier point of time prior to the retrospective change and files return in accordance with law as it existed at that date, imposition of penalty on the grounds of retrospective amendment would be unjustified.
Action of the Assessing Officer fails on both counts, namely; (i) the penalty is rightly held to be not applicable where the issue involved is so complex and debatable and the assessee had adopted a view which is quite plausible and endorsed favourably by judicial precedents at many instances. (ii) The income arising on retrospective applicability of section 13(8) inserted by Finance Act, 2012 i.e. at a time when the returns for all the assessment years in question were already filed by assessee cannot attract penalty by any stretch of imagination.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
The captioned appeals have been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad [CIT(A) in short] dated 03/02/20 17, 06/02/2017 & 07/02/2017 in the matter of assessment orders under s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) & 143(3) of the Act dated 27/02/2014, 29/03/2013 & 17/02/2014 relevant to Assessment Years (AY) 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 respectively.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
