2000 (11) TMI 277

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d CIT(A) confirming the penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 levied under s. 271B for asst. yr. 1990-91. 2. Shri Manish J. Shah, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee contended that the assessee is doing the business of sub-broker of shares and derives income by way of commission only. Except in asst. yrs. 1989-90 and 1990-91 the IT Department never considered the assessee liable for gett....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....epresentative supported the order of the CIT(A). 4. We have considered the submissions made by the learned representatives of the parties and have perused the orders. In our view, there is no justification for levy of penalty under s. 271B on the facts and circumstances of the case. The assessee could entertain a bona fide belief that the turnover of dealings in shares made on behalf of various....