2007 (1) TMI 165

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ENT The judgment of the court was delivered by RAJESH BALIA, J. - Learned counsel for the revenue submits that the record of the assessee prior to 1991 is not available and hence, they are unable to produce the same before the Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. These two appeals arise out of two separate orders passed by the Assessing Officer levying penalty under Sect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are not independent of each other and the firm is not juristic person, these transactions cannot be considered as intra person but were only for the purpose of carrying on partner's own business. The fact that under the Income Tax Act, the firm and partners of the firm are recognised as independent units, the same cannot be treated for all purposes to be separate and independent. The assessee had....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty and deleted the penalty. 7. Hence, these two appeals are before us raising the common issue in both appeals. 8. The firm was constituted with a particular object of constructing cinema and is now no more in existence. Section 273B has mitigated the penalty to be levied under Section 271 D and 271 E by providing that where assessee is able to establish that there was reasonable cause for f....