Kamlesh M. Kanungo, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 1(4), Mumbai
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 1618/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2022AY 2007-08
Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalkamlesh M. Kanungo, C/O. D.C. Bothra& Co. Llp (Ca), (Formerly Known As D.C. Bothra & Co.), 297, Tardeo Road, Wille Mansion, 1St Floor, Opp. Bank Of India, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400004. Pan: Abbpk9675R ...... Appellant Vs. Dy.Cit- Cc-1(4), 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Annexe Building, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Rajkumar Singh Respondent By : Sh. Manoj Sinha Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Cit(A)’] Dated 10.02.2021 Passed Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As [‘The Act’] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2007-08. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:
For Appellant: Sh. Rajkumar SinghFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Sinha
Section 133Section 271Section 271(1)(c)
…on 271(1)(c) is one such provision. With calamitous, albeit commercial, consequences, the provision is mandatory and brooks no trifling with or dilution. 8 ITA No. 1618/Mum/2021-Kamlesh M. Kanungo For a further precedential prop, Rajesh Kumar v. CIT [2007] 2 SCC 181, may be referred to in which the Apex Court has quoted with approval its earlier judgment in State of Orissa v. Dr.Binapani Dei [AIR 1967 SC 1269]. According to it, when by reason of action on the part of a statutory authority, civil or evil consequences ensue, principles of natural justice must be followed. In such an event, although no express pr…