2013) 33 Taxmann.com 174 (Gujarat) CIT Vs MM Gujamgadi (2007) 162 Taxmann 211 (Kar) CIT v. Punjab Tyres

142 CTR 49High Court1997#22536 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 350,364 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing 2013) 33 Taxmann.com 174 (Gujarat) CIT Vs MM Gujamgadi (2007) 162 Taxmann 211 (Kar) CIT v. Punjab Tyres

Smt. Roshni Devi, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the levy of penalty under section 271B is hereby deleted

ITA 953/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri N.S. Vyas (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT)
Section 271(1)(c)

…admission constituting evidence of concealment in penalty proceedings:- CIT Vs. Girish Devchand Rajani (2013) 33 Taxmann.com 174 (Gujarat) CIT Vs MM Gujamgadi (2007) 162 Taxmann 211 (Kar) CIT Vs Punjab Tyres (1986) 162 ITR 517 (MP) CIT Vs. Jaswant Rai (1997) 142 CTR 49 (P&H) CIT Vs Mecon Builders & Engineers (2001) 248 ITR 159 (Del.) CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2013) ITRV-HC-KAR-093) In the following cases it was also held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) could not be levied where addition has been made on estimate basis:- Surat Fashions Ltd. Vs ACIT (2011) ITRV-ITAT-AHD-134) Narayansingh J Deora Vs A…

Smt. Roshni Devi, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the levy of penalty under section 271B is hereby deleted

ITA 952/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri N.S. Vyas (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT)
Section 271(1)(c)

…admission constituting evidence of concealment in penalty proceedings:- CIT Vs. Girish Devchand Rajani (2013) 33 Taxmann.com 174 (Gujarat) CIT Vs MM Gujamgadi (2007) 162 Taxmann 211 (Kar) CIT Vs Punjab Tyres (1986) 162 ITR 517 (MP) CIT Vs. Jaswant Rai (1997) 142 CTR 49 (P&H) CIT Vs Mecon Builders & Engineers (2001) 248 ITR 159 (Del.) CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2013) ITRV-HC-KAR-093) In the following cases it was also held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) could not be levied where addition has been made on estimate basis:- Surat Fashions Ltd. Vs ACIT (2011) ITRV-ITAT-AHD-134) Narayansingh J Deora Vs A…

Smt. Roshni Devi, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the levy of penalty under section 271B is hereby deleted

ITA 951/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri N.S. Vyas (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT)
Section 271(1)(c)

…admission constituting evidence of concealment in penalty proceedings:- CIT Vs. Girish Devchand Rajani (2013) 33 Taxmann.com 174 (Gujarat) CIT Vs MM Gujamgadi (2007) 162 Taxmann 211 (Kar) CIT Vs Punjab Tyres (1986) 162 ITR 517 (MP) CIT Vs. Jaswant Rai (1997) 142 CTR 49 (P&H) CIT Vs Mecon Builders & Engineers (2001) 248 ITR 159 (Del.) CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2013) ITRV-HC-KAR-093) In the following cases it was also held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) could not be levied where addition has been made on estimate basis:- Surat Fashions Ltd. Vs ACIT (2011) ITRV-ITAT-AHD-134) Narayansingh J Deora Vs A…

2013) 33 Taxmann.com 174 (Gujarat) CIT Vs MM Gujamgadi (2007) 162 Taxmann 211 (Kar) CIT v. Punjab Tyres (142 CTR 49) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax