276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd.

223 ITR 264Reported decision1997#10360 most cited

What is 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. authority for?

Penalty is not sustainable when an addition to income is made on an estimate basis.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Raj Bans Singh · 276 ITR 351 · penalty · estimate basis · addition to income · Sanghi Brothers · Adamkhan · Harigopal Singh

Judgments citing 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd.

Anup A. Shah, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle-2, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 106/RJT/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Mar 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 106/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Years: 2005-2006 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A

…addition is made on the estimatebasis, no penalty is sustainable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No su…

Shri Krishanmohan Ramwadh Shingh, Jamnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Jamnagar

In the result appeal, of the assessee is allowed

ITA 379/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…addition is made on the estimatebasis, no penalty is sustainable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No su…

M/S. Asian Agency, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circel-7(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 128/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin
Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

…inable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— ITA No. 3048/Ahd/14 & 6 Ors. [M/s. Asian Agency] - 21 - 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No s…

M/S. Asian Agency, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circel-7(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 127/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin
Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

…inable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— ITA No. 3048/Ahd/14 & 6 Ors. [M/s. Asian Agency] - 21 - 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No s…

M/S. Asian Agency, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circel-7(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 126/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin
Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

…inable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— ITA No. 3048/Ahd/14 & 6 Ors. [M/s. Asian Agency] - 21 - 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No s…

M/S. Asian Agency, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-7(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3448/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin
Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

…inable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— ITA No. 3048/Ahd/14 & 6 Ors. [M/s. Asian Agency] - 21 - 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No s…

M/S. Asian Agency, Ahmedabad vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, VII, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 844/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin
Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

…inable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— ITA No. 3048/Ahd/14 & 6 Ors. [M/s. Asian Agency] - 21 - 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No s…

The ITO, Ward-7(2)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Asian Agency, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3336/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin
Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

…inable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— ITA No. 3048/Ahd/14 & 6 Ors. [M/s. Asian Agency] - 21 - 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No s…

M/S. Asian Agency, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-12, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3048/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin
Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

…inable as per the ratio laid down in the following cases:— ITA No. 3048/Ahd/14 & 6 Ors. [M/s. Asian Agency] - 21 - 1. CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 129 (M.P).; 3. CIT v. Adamkhan [1997] 223 ITR 264/95 Taxman 215 (Mad.); and 4. Harigopal Singh v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85/125 Taxman 242 (Punj. & Har.) In view of above, by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. No s…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Shri Navneet Gupta, Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 445/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: None PresentFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…n and the assessee also relied on the various case laws to support his claim that no penalty can be levied on surrendered income and the case laws are as under :- (i) CIT V s Harshvardhan Chemicals & Minerals Ltd, 259 ITR 212 [2003] (Raj) 3 CIT Vs Adamkhan, 223 ITR 264 [1997] (Mad) (iii) Akshay Bhander Vs CIT, 220 ITR 325 [1996] (Gau) 7.1 From the above, we find AO has not detected any concealment of income either in the return of income or in the books of accounts of the assessee. In our considered opinion, the case of the assessee is also supported by the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd (2010)…

276 ITR 351 (All.) 2. CWT v. Sanghi Brothers (India) Ltd. (223 ITR 264) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax