1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.507 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-III. ... Appellant. Vs. M/s.Saidutta Enterprises. ...Respondent. ..... Mr.S.K. Bhatnagar with Mr.N.R. Prajapati for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. 18th January, 2010. P.C.: The appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law : “ Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in deleting the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) when the relevant A.Y.2002-03, the Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was in the statute?” The Respondent is absent though served. The Tribunal has followed the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Pritipal Singh & Co., 249 ITR 670 and a judgment of this Court dated 25th July 2005 in CIT vs. Orient Syntex Ltd., ITA 1069 of 2000. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court 2 subsequently, in CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P). Ltd., (2008) 304 ITR 308, the earlier judgment was held not to lay down the correct position in law. In the circumstances, this appeal would have to be allowed and proceedings remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision on merits. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the judgment of the Tribunal dated 17th August 2006 is set aside. The proceedings shall stand remanded back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision on merits. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, J.)