2009 (10) TMI 483

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by 1. V. G. Sabhahit J.-This appeal by the Revenue is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji in  I. T. A.  No. 34/PANJ/2006 wherein the Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and set aside the penalty imposed upon the assessee under section 271(1)© of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....late Tribunal, Panaji Bench (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") and the Tribunal considered the said appeal along with I. T. A. No. 35/PANJ/2006 and by a common order dated February 13, 2006, held that there was no mala fide intention in suppressing the said income in view of the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 30....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....finding ?" 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Though notice has been served, the respondent has not chosen to appear before the court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal impugned in this appeal is perverse and arbitrary as there is no finding that the explanation given by the assessee falls within any of the Exp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hows that the Tribunal has proceeded mainly on the basis that it was necessary to prove that there was a mala fide intention on the part of the assessee for imposing penalty. The said reasoning cannot be sustained in view of the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v.  Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 306 ITR 277 referred to above. 5. Further, it is also clear from ....