2018 (2) TMI 1467

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order dated 18th March 2015 is in respect of Assessment Year 2005-06. The Appeal is awaiting admission. The Appeal itself would come up for consideration in its normal turn. 3. The Applicant states that the urgency in moving this application for stay pending the consideration of the Appeal has arisen in view of the fact that consequent to the impugned order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has commenced recovery proceedings. Mr. Walve, the learned counsel for the Revenue confirms that the Revenue has decided to proceed with the recovery of its dues. Mr. Vaidya, the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant / Applicant in support of the application states that he is not ready for t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of penalty in further Appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order dated 18th March 2015, the Tribunal partly allowed the Appeal by restoring the issue of amounts received in cash from agriculturists to the Assessing Officer to verify whether the agriculturists were not having banking facilities so as to delete the penalty under Section 271 D of the Act, on account of reasonable cause in such cases. 6. The Applicant seeks a stay of the impugned order of the Tribunal on the following two grounds:- (a) the impugned order is exfacie bad in law as in quantum proceedings, the addition made under Section 68 of the Act was deleted. Consequently, no penalty under Section 271D could be imposed. In support of this reliance was placed on the de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer was directed to frame assessment order denovo. In the order passed subsequent to the remand, the Assessing Officer did not initiate any penalty proceedings under the 271D of the Act. Consequently, there could be no occasion to impose penalty. Therefore, in the facts of that case as the Assessment order which initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271 D of the Act had itself been set aside the satisfaction recorded in the earlier order for initiating penalty proceedings would not survive. In the present facts the assessment order which initiated penalty proceedings has not been set aside and therefore, the aforesaid decision would have no application in the facts of the present case. 8. So far as the ....