SHIRISH CHANDRAKANT SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1170/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 November 2019AY 1991-9223 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the immunity granted by the ITSC after the second application covered the entire income declared by the assessee for the relevant assessment years. Therefore, the penalty proceedings initiated by the AO were not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was assessed after a search and subsequent proceedings before the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC). The ITSC granted immunity from penalty and prosecution after the assessee declared income in a second application. However, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings for concealment.

What were the issues?

Whether the immunity granted by the Income Tax Settlement Commission extends to penalty proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer for concealment of income. Whether the tax authorities can split the immunity granted by the ITSC between two applications.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c),Section 245C(1),Section 245H

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, “G”

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM

आदेशकीप्रनिनिनिअग्रेनर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी/ The Appellant 1. 2. प्रत्यथी/ The Respondent

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →