626 (Mad.) (iii) CIT vs. Nem Kumar Jain (2006) 151 Taxman 187 (All.) (iv) CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel

84 ITD 370Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2003#21477 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing 626 (Mad.) (iii) CIT vs. Nem Kumar Jain (2006) 151 Taxman 187 (All.) (iv) CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel

Narpat Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7662/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Shri Narpat Mehta, Vs. Acit – Cc-23, Mumbai 202, Sukh Jyot, Telpal Scheme No.1, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai - 400057 Pan/Gir No. Aaepm9981G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…wherein similar penalty imposed for the amount surrendered during course of search was deleted by Tribunal. 4 ITA No.7662-2014 Shri Narpat Mehta 9. Reliance was also placed on the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Gulabrai V Gandhi vs. ACIT, reported as 84 ITD 370 (ITAT Mumbai), wherein it was held that when the statement u/s 132(4) was recorded in question and answer form, the benefit of immunity from penalty cannot be denied to the assessee on the ground of not specifying the manner in which income was derived by her. 10. On similar facts ITAT, Delhi in the case of Mrs. Raj Rani Gupta in ITA ITA No. 5445…

DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai vs. Shashikiran Shetty, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 5978/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…Mahendra C. Shah (2008) 299 ITR 305 (Guj.) (ii) CIT vs. E.V. Balashanmugham (2006) 286 ITR 626 (Mad.) (iii) CIT vs. Nem Kumar Jain (2006) 151 Taxman 187 (All.) (iv) CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel (2005) 278 ITR 454 (All.) (v) Gulabrai V. Gandhi vs. ACIT (2003) 84 ITD 370 (Mum.) (vi) Ashok Kumar Sharma vs. DCIT (ITA Nos.476 & 477/CTK/2011) (ITAT, Cuttack) dated 22.12.2011. (vii) Pramod Kumar Jain, Bargarh vs. DCIT (ITA Nos.131,132 & 133/CTK/2012) (ITAT Cuttack) dated 20.07.2012 (viii) CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel (278 ITR 454) (All.) (ix) DCIT vs. Pioneer Online (ITA No.1324/Ko1/2011) dated 17.02.2012 (x) DCIT vs.…

Shashikiran Shetty, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 5813/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…Mahendra C. Shah (2008) 299 ITR 305 (Guj.) (ii) CIT vs. E.V. Balashanmugham (2006) 286 ITR 626 (Mad.) (iii) CIT vs. Nem Kumar Jain (2006) 151 Taxman 187 (All.) (iv) CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel (2005) 278 ITR 454 (All.) (v) Gulabrai V. Gandhi vs. ACIT (2003) 84 ITD 370 (Mum.) (vi) Ashok Kumar Sharma vs. DCIT (ITA Nos.476 & 477/CTK/2011) (ITAT, Cuttack) dated 22.12.2011. (vii) Pramod Kumar Jain, Bargarh vs. DCIT (ITA Nos.131,132 & 133/CTK/2012) (ITAT Cuttack) dated 20.07.2012 (viii) CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel (278 ITR 454) (All.) (ix) DCIT vs. Pioneer Online (ITA No.1324/Ko1/2011) dated 17.02.2012 (x) DCIT vs.…

Options Developrs and Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ce Cir 22, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the ld

ITA 7129/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2010-11 Options Developers & Acit, Central Circle-22, Builders, Room No.465, बनाम/ 10, Mithila Shopping Centre Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ground Floor, V. M. Road, M.K. Road, Juhu Scheme Vile Parle (W) Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400049 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaafo6752F "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Vijay Kothari Ms. Sudha Ramchandran-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 05/05/2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

Section 132Section 271A

…the assessee is having a good case in its favour. 2.13. In another case, decided by the Tribunal of Delhi Bench in Sudha Gupta vs DCIT (ITA No.5445/Del/2012) order dated 22/08/2014, wherein other cases from the Tribunal such as Gulabrai V. Gandhi vs ACIT (84 ITD 370), Rajrani Gupta (ITA No.3371/Del./2011) order dated 30/03/2012, ITA No.3372/Del/2011) dated 12/10/2012, decision in Mahendra 20 M/s Options Developers & Builders C. Shah (supra) from Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, case of Mother pride Education Personna Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT (ITA No.3372/D/2011) order dated 12/10/2012, etc were considered and penalt…

626 (Mad.) (iii) CIT vs. Nem Kumar Jain (2006) 151 Taxman 187 (All.) (iv) CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel (84 ITD 370) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax