THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GULBARGA vs. M/S MANJUNATHA COTTON AND GINNING FACTORY

ITA/2564/2005HC KarnatakaKAHC01026158200513 December 2012Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,N.KUMAR109 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that penalty could not be imposed if the assessee's explanation was bonafide and not found to be false, even if the addition was accepted. The High Court affirmed that penalty proceedings must be initiated correctly and based on the correct grounds.

What were the facts?

During surveys, discrepancies were found in the assessees' books, leading to additions to income. In some cases, assessees admitted additions, while in others, explanations were provided but not fully substantiated. Penalty proceedings were initiated based on these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be levied when the assessee's explanation for additions is bonafide, and whether penalty proceedings were initiated correctly based on the findings of the assessing or appellate authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271,Section 133A,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 2,590 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

Cases cited in this judgment(16)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.

® IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

Dated this the 13th day of December, 2012 PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR

AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR C/w ITA No.2565/2005, ITA No.5020/2009, ITA No. 5022/2009, ITA No. 5023/2009, and In ITA No.2564 of 2005 BETWEEN:

1.

The Commissioner of Income Tax C. R. Building Gulbarga

2

2.

The Income Tax Officer Ward-I C. R. Building Bellary

…Appellants

(By Sri Y.V. Raviraj, Advocate)

AND:

M/s. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory Andral Road Bellary

…Respondent

(By Sri A. Shankar, Advocate)

This ITA filed under Section 260A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 21-12-2005 passed in ITA No.1307/Bang/2003 for the Assessment year 2000-01, praying to (i) formulate the substantial question of law stated therein; (ii) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT, as prayed for therein.

In ITA No.2565 of 2005 BETWEEN:

1.

The Commissioner of Income Tax C. R. Building Gulbarga

3.

The Income Tax Officer Ward-I

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

All 211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →