The Commissioner of Income-tax, International Taxation -1 v. Adidas Sourcing Ltd - 2019-LL-0805-74

Citation	2019-LL-0805-74
Appellant Name	The Commissioner of Income-tax, International Taxation -1
Respondent Name	Adidas Sourcing Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	05/08/2019
Assessment Year	2007-08
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	original return • revised return • penalty • debatable issue
Bot Summary:	This is a penalty appeal by the Revenue against an order dated 29th January, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 2668/Del/2015 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. The question sought to be urged is whether the ITAT was right in deleting the penalty imposed on the Respondent for the AY in question 3. It is seen that although the Assessee did not offer certain amounts to tax at the time of filing the original return and sought to claim it in the revised return, the Assessee during the course of the assessment proceedings offered those amounts to tax and the assessment was completed accordingly. It has been concurrently held by the Commissioner of Income Tax CIT as well as the ITAT that the issues on which the amounts were offered to tax were debatable ones and therefore there was no occasion to levy a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. With the findings of the CIT as well as the ITAT being concurrent, this Court is not inclined to interfere.

IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 722/2019 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1 Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Senior Standing Counsel for Revenue. versus ADIDAS SOURCING LTD. Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH ORDER % 05.08.2019 1. This is penalty appeal by Revenue against order dated 29th January, 2019 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) in ITA No. 2668/Del/2015 for Assessment Year (AY) 2007-08. 2. question sought to be urged is whether ITAT was right in deleting penalty imposed on Respondent for AY in question? 3. It is seen that although Assessee did not offer certain amounts to tax at time of filing original return and sought to claim it in revised return, Assessee during course of assessment proceedings offered those amounts to tax and assessment was completed accordingly. It has been concurrently held by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ CIT (A) ] as well as ITAT that issues on which amounts were offered to tax were debatable ones and therefore there was no occasion to levy penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of Act. 4. With findings of CIT (A) as well as ITAT being concurrent, this Court is not inclined to interfere. 5. No substantial question of law arises. appeal is dismissed. S. MURALIDHAR, J. TALWANT SINGH, J. AUGUST 05, 2019 mr Commissioner of Income-tax, International Taxation -1 v. Adidas Sourcing Ltd

Metadata

Judgment