SARDARI LAL AGGARWAL,NAWANSHAHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, NAWANSHAHR

ITA 620/ASR/2024Status: HeardITAT Amritsar09 September 2026AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that penalties for concealment are not leviable when the underlying addition is purely consequential to an estimated income, as estimation does not establish deliberate concealment. The penalties were deleted, following the Punjab & Haryana High Court decision in CIT vs. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd.

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was estimated at 8% of turnover by the Tribunal in quantum appeals. Based on this estimation, penalties were levied for concealment of income for assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is leviable when the addition to income is based on estimation rather than conclusive evidence of concealment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No.619/ASR/2024
ITA No.620/ASR/2024
ITA No.621/ASR/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2009- 10 to 2011-12 assails confirmation / levy of penalty us 271(1)(C). The appeal for AY 2009-10 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner

of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 03.10.2024 confirming impug

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →