SITARAM PANSARI,TRANSPORT NAGAR, MAIN ROAD, KUJU vs. ITO(WARD 2(3)), RAMGARH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the quantum additions forming the basis of penalty proceedings were set aside, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) and Section 271AAC(1) had no foundation. Therefore, the penalties were deleted.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for multiple assessment years. The assessee's quantum appeals related to unexplained cash credit under Section 68 were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether penalties levied for unexplained cash credits could sustain when the underlying quantum additions were set aside for fresh adjudication. The second issue concerned the validity of penalties levied under Section 271(1)(c) and Section 271AAC(1) in light of the restored quantum proceedings.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Bench These four appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 13.3.2026, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18, respectively.
P a g e 1 | 3
ITA No.263 to 266/Ran/2026
Shri Akash Agrawal, Adv appeared for the assessee and Shri Sandipan Khan, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
At the outset, ld AR of the assessee produced a copy of the order of the Tribunal dated 9.10.2025 in ITA No.123 to 126/Ran/2024 passed in quantum appeals of the assessee, wherein, the issues are restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on the issue of unexplained cash credit u
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.
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 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026