DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the penalty proceedings were barred by limitation, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. Additionally, the Tribunal found that penalty under Section 271E was not sustainable due to the absence of satisfaction in the assessment order.
What were the facts?
The revenue filed appeals against the deletion of penalties by the CIT(A) for various assessment years. The assessee filed cross-objections challenging the penalty levies.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty proceedings under Section 271E were initiated within the limitation period and whether proper satisfaction was recorded for initiating such penalties.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(19)Show listHide 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.
- Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT151 citing265 ITR 25 · 2004 · HC
- CIT v. Hissaria Bros.132 citing291 ITR 244 · 2007 · HC
- CIT v. Krishi Tyre Retreading and Rubber Industries117 citing360 ITR 580 · 2014 · HC
- CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills110 citing379 ITR 521 · 2015 · SC
- Principal Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd.86 citing394 ITR 312 · 2017 · HC
- CIT v. Hissaria Brothers68 citing74 Taxmann.com 22 · 2016 · SC
- Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 v. JKD\nCapital & Finlease Ltd.51 citing378 ITR 614 · 2015 · HC
- CIT v. Standard Brands Ltd.41 citing285 ITR 295 · 2006 · HC
- CIT v. Jitendra Singh Rathore39 citing352 ITR 327 · 2013 · HC · Read judgment
- Jagdish Chandra Suwalka v. Joint\nCommissioner of Income-tax24 citing154 Taxmann.com 504 · 2023
- Commissioner of Income-tax, Bikaner v. Hissaria Brothers, Hanumangarh Jn23 citing243 Taxmann 174 · 2016 · SC
- CIT v. Jitendra\nSingh Rathore20 citing31 Taxmann.com 52 · 2013
- Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT18 citing167 Taxmann.com 352 · 2024 · HC
- CIT v. M.A. Presstressed\nWorks16 citing220 ITR 226 · HC
- 75 (SC) Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT10 citing172 Taxmann.com 54 · 2025 · HC
- Bhowmick Raj Singh v. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax6 citing171 Taxmann.com 575 · 2025
- Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shyam 77-78 Corporation5 citing218 Taxmann 136 · HC
- Navin Kumar v. JCIT, Bhatinda in ITAT Amritsar5 citing98 ITD 242 · 2006 · ITAT
- 22 ACIT, Alwar v. Shri Babu Lal Data, Alwar DIT(Exemptions) Vs. Young Men Christian Association3 citing111 DTR 77 · 2014 · HC
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1162, 1164 to 1170, 1174 to 1178/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2015-16 to 2021-22 cuke Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Vs. Central Circle-02, Developers Pvt. Ltd. Jaipur Central Circle-03, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:AAECG8317K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO. Nos. 34 to 46/JPR/2025 (Arising out of ITA. No. 769/JPR/2023) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2015-16 to 2021-22 cuke M/s Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Central Circle-03, Jaipur Central Circle-02, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAECG8317K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Vijay Goyal, CA & Shri Gulshan Agrwal, CA jktLodh vksjls@Revenue by: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 29/10/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 13/11/2025
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 271D
- Sujatha Vaddanapu, Nalgonda vs ITO, Ward-1, NalgondaITA 2048/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Inder Lal Ramrakhyani, Dhamtari vs ITO, DhamtariITA 694/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Harshit Singhania Buildcon, RaipurITA 560/RPR/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shree Jalaram Finance, Borsad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(4), PetladITA 1785/AHD/2026[2000-01]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2000-01
- Veera Mani Kumari Vattikooti, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward -11(1), HyderabadITA 1218/HYD/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026