ASHOK KUMAR ARORA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee's explanation, though reproduced, was not considered independently in the penalty proceedings. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an original return of income, but after a search under Section 132, a notice under Section 153A was issued. The assessee then declared a higher income, which was accepted, leading to a penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) upheld this penalty.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was rightly imposed and upheld when the assessee's explanation was not independently considered by the authorities. The proper consideration of the assessee's explanation in penalty proceedings.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)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.
- Prem Arora v. DCIT19 citing24 Taxmann.com 260 · 2012 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-I’ NEW DELHI
Before: SMT DIVA SINGH
Date of Hearing 09.09.2015 Date of Pronouncement 23.09.2015 ORDER By the present appeal the assessee assails the correctness of the order dated 10.10.2013 of CIT(A)-XXXIII, New Delhi pertaining to 2008-09 assessment year wherein the penalty of Rs. 1,36,066/- imposed by the AO has been upheld by the CIT(A).
Various grounds have been raised by the assessee in the present appeal. However, reference thereto is being abstained from in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case which are being referred to herein after. A perusal of the record shows that in the original return of income filed by the assessee on 26.07.2008 income of Rs.9,93,800/- was declared. The assessee alongwith Dawat Group of cases was subjected to search on 10.02.2009 u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly notice u/s 153A was issued on 07.10.2009 requiring the assessee to file its return of income for the year under consideration as it was one of the 6 assessment years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted. Pursuant to the notice u/s 153A and 142(1) alongwith questionnaire etc. the assessee declared an income of Rs.13,94,120/- which was accepted. As a result of this, penalty u/s I.T.A .No.-841/Del/2014
More judgments on Section 132
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026