MARUTI DEVELOPERS,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(3), SURAT

ITA 1017/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 November 2018AY 2001-0213 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted additional evidence, including affidavits confirming the refund of booking advances. The penalty orders were set aside and the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee firm, Maruti Developers, was found to have made significant payments for land purchase without filing returns or being assessed to tax. Additions were made for unexplained capital introduction and cash credits, leading to penalty proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is leviable when additional evidence suggests the cash credits were explained by refunds due to inability to secure land possession.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: SHRI C.M.GARG & SHRI O.P.MEENA

Hearing: 25.10.2018

PER O. P. MEENA, ACCOUTANT MEMBER:

1.

These two appeals filed by the Assessee are directed against separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Surat(in short “the CIT (A)”) both dated 14.12.2012 pertaining to Assessment Years 2001-02 and 2002-03 respectively which in turn has arisen from the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-

Maruti Developers

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 →