178 ITR 628 P&H, Hotel And Allied Trades P.Ltd. v. CIT

221 ITR 619High Court1996#7341 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 131(1A)Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 269SSSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

Issues it is cited on

section 275(1)section 275(1)(c)penalty under section 271dsection 269tsection 275section 271esection 271(l)(c)section 142(2a)section 131(1a)retracted statementsection 269sssection 271d

Judgments citing 178 ITR 628 P&H, Hotel And Allied Trades P.Ltd. v. CIT

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 618/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 617/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL ,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 616/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 615/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 614/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 613/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 612/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL ,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 611/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

DCIT CC7 (2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. ANIK INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2267/MUM/2021[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit, Cc-7(2) Vs. M/S Anik Industries Ltd Room No. 655, 3Rd Floor, 610, Tulsiani Aayakar Bhavan, Chamber, Nariman Point Mk Road, Mumbai – 400021. Mumbai – 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm2696K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Smt Shailja Rai.Dr Respondent By : Shri.Bhupendra Shah.Ar Date Of Hearing 26.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) U/S 271(1)(C) & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Smt Shailja Rai.DRFor Respondent: Shri.Bhupendra Shah.AR
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)

…t from those that arising assessment proceedings as held in Banaras Textorium v. CIT (1988) 169 ITR 782, 790, 791 (All) ; CIT v. Govindankutty Menon (1989) 178 M/s Anik Industires Ltd., Mumbai. IT 509, 515 (Ker) ; Hotel & Allied Trades (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1996) 221 ITR 619, 646 (Ker). 6.2.27. It is also pertinent to refer here the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Anantharam Illies Engg.Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457, 462 (SC), wherein it is held that the findings recorded in assessment order constitute good evidence in the penalty proceedings but those findings cannot be regarded…

ILLIES ENGINEERING INDIA PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 109/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Michael Jerald, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…penalty proceedings are different from those that arising assessment proceedings as held in Banaras Textorium v. CIT (1988) 169 ITR 782, 790, 791 (All) ; CIT v. Govindankutty Menon (1989) 178 ITR 509, 515 (Ker) ; Hotel & Allied Trades (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1996) 221 ITR 619, 646 (Ker). We may refer here to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam 16 Illies Engg. Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457, 462 (SC), wherein it is held that the findings recorded in assessment order constitute good evidence in the penalty proceedings but those findings cannot be regarded as conclusive fo…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RESURGERE MINES AND MINERALS INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1531/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA and Shri Ashish Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…oceedings are different from those that arise in assessment proceedings. ITA No.- 1531/Del/2017. M/s Resurgere Mines and Minerals India Ltd. a. 169 ITR 782 (All) Banaras Textiles b. CIT vs Govind Gokhale 178 ITR 509 (Ker). c. Hotels a Allied Traders vs CIT 221 ITR 619 (Kar) (ii) Finding recorded in Asstt. Order constitute good evidence but cannot be reported in conclusion. a. Anantharam Veerasinghani a Co. vs err 123 ITR 457 b. CIT vs Ishtiaq Hussain 232 tm 673 (All). (iii)Finding contained in the Asstt. Order would not be of any use. AO is required to record its own findings in penalty order. a. CIT vs R…

SHOE CRAFTERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 17(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3264/MUM/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S Shoe Crafters, 204, Dy. Commissioner Of Wadala Udhyog Bhavan, Income Tax 17(2), Vs. Naigon Cross Road, Piramal Chambers 6Th Wadala, Mumbai-400031. Floor, Lalbaug, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Aaifs5140H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mukesh B. Advani, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Satishchandra Rajore, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/10/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2018 Order Per N.K. Pradhan, Am This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2004-05. The Appeal Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32 [In Short ‘Cit(A)’], Mumbai & Arises Out Of The Penalty Levied U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (The ‘Act’). 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Filed By The Assessee Read As Under: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 Amounting To Rs.4,46,812/-, In Spite Of The Fact That The Appellant, Has Neither Concealed Any Particulars Of Income

For Appellant: Mr. Mukesh B. Advani, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Satishchandra Rajore, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(2)(b)

…penalty proceedings are different from those that arise in assessment proceedings as held in Banaras Textoriun v. CIT (1988) 169 ITR 782, 790, 791 (All); CIT v. Govindankutty Menon (1989) 178 ITR 509, 515 (Ker); Hotel & Allied Traders (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1996) 221 ITR 619, 646 (Ker). In the instant case, as mentioned above, the penalty has been levied on the disallowances of the claims made by the assessee. In Reliance Petroproducts (P.) Ltd. (supra), it is held that merely because assessee had claimed expenditure, which claim was not accepted or was not acceptable to the revenue, that by itself would not attract…

CAPRICON REALTY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5724/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 5724/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri. K. Gopal/For Respondent: Shri H.N Singh,CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…nt judgement is provided. iii) The assessee company relied on following judicial pronouncements; a) Banaras Textorium Vs. CIT (1988) 169 ITR 782 (All) b) CIT Vs. T. Govindankutty Menon (1989) 178 ITR 509 (ker) c) Hotel & Allied Trades (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1996) 221 ITR 619 (Ker)” The A.O observed that the assessee wrongly claimed expenses leading to higher losses to be carried forward and set off against future business profits, wherein it was not entitled to claim said expenses as the assessee was following project completion method and no project was completed during the year under consideration, thus leading to…

ROYAL NURSING HOME,MUMBAI vs. ITO 11(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1519/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay B. Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Swapan Kumar Bepari, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

…re 5 different from those that arise in assessment proceedings . We rely on the decision in Banaras Textorium vs CIT, (1988) 169 ITR 782, 790, 791 (All); CIT vs Govindankutty Menon, (1989) 178 ITR 509, 515 (Ker); Hotel & Allied Trades (P) Ltd. vs CIT, (1996) 221 ITR 619, 646 (Ker). 6.4 We find that the following substantial question of law of the assessee has been admitted by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (ITA No. 1202 of 2011): ‘’Whether the order of the Appellate Tribunal is perverse as it has directed the Respondent No. 1 to adopt the purchase cost of the medicines as the income of the Appellant overlooking…

ITO 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. AMRIT PETROLEUMS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5745/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajnikant Chaniyari,ARFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar,DR
Section 145(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…s are different from those that arise in assessment proceedings . We rely on the decision in Banaras Textorium vs CIT, (1988) 169 ITR 782, 790, 791 (All); CIT vs Govindankutty Menon, (1989) 178 ITR 509, 515 (Ker); Hotel & Allied Trades (P) Ltd. vs CIT, (1996) 221 ITR 619, 646 (Ker). 4 8. In view of the reasons delineated at para 7, 7.1 & 7.2 here-in- above, we uphold the order of the learned CIT(A). 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/01/2017 (SAKTIJIT DEY) N.K. PRADHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 27/01/2017 Biswajit,…

178 ITR 628 P&H, Hotel And Allied Trades P.Ltd. v. CIT (221 ITR 619) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax