1. ' AJMAL MIAN J.-These are direct income-tax references under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 between the same parties, pertaining to the assessment years 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72 and raise the following question of law :- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in vacating the order of penalty passed by the Income-tax Officer under section 46(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. 7"
2. Learned counsel for the parties point out that the above-quoted question covered by a number of judgments of the High Courts as well as one judgment of the Supreme Court. Reference may be made in this regard to the case of Messrs Bawani Violen Textile Mills v. Commissioner o Income-tax (1), The Commissioner of Income-tax, Rawalpindi Zone, Rawalpindi v. Begum Mumtaz Jamal (2), Commissioner of Income-tax, Karachi (East), Karachi v. Azam Industries Ltd., Karachi (3) and Commissioner of Income-tax, Lahore v. Zamir and Sons, Lahore (4). {{FOOT NOTE}}
(1) PLD 1967 Kar. 688 (2) 1976 PTD 182
(3) 1980 P 1 D 26 (4) 1981 P 1 D 137 {{FOOT NOTE}} ' In addition to the above cases there have been a number of judgments given by various Division Benches of this Court including this Bench.
3. ' We see no reason to take different view in the above matters, and therefore, our answer to the above question is in the affirmative. There will be no order as to costs.