2013 (9) TMI 1097
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Respondent : Mr. G.N. Makwana O R D E R PER DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JM: These cross appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are directed against the order of the Ld.CIT(A)-16, Mumbai dated 13.05.2010 partly confirming the penalty levied by the AO u/s 271 (1)(C) of the Income Tax Act on account of various disallowances/additions made in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act in for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of law u/s 260A, it is needless to emphasis that the issue is debatable and accordingly, no penalty is imposable u/s 271(1)(c) of Act. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Liquid Investment & Trading Co. [in ITA No.240/2009] vide its judgment dated 5.10.2010 has held that an issue becomes debatable on the admission of substantial question of law against the Tribunal order by the High Court. In ....
TaxTMI