Income Tax Appeal No. 70 of 2010 Income Tax Appeal No. 71 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I.T.A. No. 70 of 2010 Date of Decision: February 15, 2010 The Commissioner of Income tax-I Chandigar ----Appellant Versus M/s. Chandigarh Zever Mehal Pvt. Ltd. Shop No. 8-9, Sec. 20-C Chandigarh ---Respondent I.T.A. No. No. 71 of 2010 The Commissioner of Income tax-I Chandigar ----Appellant Versus M/s. Prince Zever Mehal Pvt. Ltd. Booth No. 47, Sec. 19-C Chandigarh ---Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** M.M. KUMAR, J. Revenue has approached this court challenging the composite order dated 24.04.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A', Chandigarh (for brevity 'the Tribunal') in ITA Nos. 110 & 111/Chd/2009 in respect of the assessment year 2006-07. Therefore, both the appeals bearing I.T.A. Nos. 70 and 71 of 2010 are Income Tax Appeal No. 70 of 2010 Income Tax Appeal No. 71 of 2010 -2- being disposed of jointly. The findings recorded by the CIT(A) in its order dated 28.11.2008 as affirmed by the Tribunal in the impugned order are categorical that penalty of Rs. 22,64,168 and Rs. 17,46,606 has been rightly deleted because no benefit has been claimed by the assessee-respondent by virtue of claimed bad debts. In para 4 it has been found that there was no evidence on record that the claim of the assessee was not bona fide and there was no intention of evading tax by the assessee because the claimed bad debts has not been set off against any income. Accordingly, it has been held that penalty is not leviable automatically because Assessing Officer is supposed to show inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of two incomes by the assessee. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, we find that these are concurrent findings of fact, which would not be open to interference of this Court. These findings of fact are necessarily based on evidence and both the appeals do not warrant admission because no question of law much less a substantive question of law would arise for determination of this Court. Accordingly, both the appeals fail and are hereby dismissed. A photocopy of this order be placed on the record of connected appeal. (M.M. KUMAR) Judge (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) 15th February, 2010 Judge Atul