322 ITR 73 (P&H) (c) CIT v. Ashim Kumar Agarwal & Another

275 ITR 206High Court2005#24157 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing 322 ITR 73 (P&H) (c) CIT v. Ashim Kumar Agarwal & Another

Neysa Jewllery Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5934/MUM/2025[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing)

Section 10ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ered Accountant and on realizing mistake offered the same for tax and thus, no such penalty is leviable on such facts. To support such view, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT vs S.D. Rice Mills (2005) 275 ITR 206 (Punjab & Haryana) and Supreme Court in Price Waterhouse Coopers (P.) Ltd. vs CIT (2012) 348 ITR 306 / 25 taxmann.com 400 (SC). 7. On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue submits that surrender of claim under section 10…

M/S Alp Overseas Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6140/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…was due to the mistake of Chartered Accountant not to add back such provision in the computation of income of the year under consideration. Therefore, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rice Mills (SD) (2205) 275 ITR 206, where it has been held that the fault of Chartered Accountant cannot be visited on the assessee, in our considered opinion, no adverse inference can be drawn against the assessee. Various decisions relied by 11 [Type the document title] the assessee also make out the case of the assessee. This being a bona fide mistake, the assessee did not cha…

M/S. Vivek Gyan Uday Foundation, New Delhi vs. ADIT(E), New Delhi

In the result the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 530/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri S.V.Mehrotra, Am Ita No. 530/Del./2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Ramesh Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jain, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 271(1)(c)

…see was bona fide, then no penalty is leviable (a) CIT vs. S. Dhanabal [2009] 309 ITR 268 (Delhi) (b) CIT vs. Shahabad Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 73 (P&H) (c) CIT vs. Ashim Kumar Agarwal & Another, 275 ITR 48 (Jharkhand) (d) CIT vs. S D Rice Mills 275 ITR 206 (P&H) (e) K C Builders vs. Asstt. CIT 265 ITR 562 (SC) (f) SPS Steel & Power Ltd. ITA no. 1391 & 1414/Kol/2011. 6. Ld. DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 7. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the appeal. The facts are not disputed. The only issue for consideration is whether the assessee’s claim wa…