ACIT v. Advance Film Club

50 ITD 31Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#18010 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also reported as

45 TTJ 259

Issues it is cited on

section 13(8)proviso to section 2(15)section 11(1)section 22section 2(15)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomepenalty under section 271(1)(c)delay in filing appealfurnishing inaccurate particularspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 12aaconcealment of income

Judgments citing ACIT v. Advance Film Club

ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 389/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

…conditions mentioned under the said section must be fulfilled. So long as the said conditions are not fulfilled penalty cannot be levied, which has been settled in the following cases: a. ACIT v/s Advance Film Club 45 TTJ 259 (AHD) b. ITO v/s Ambica Agencied 50 ITD 31 (Hyd) (SMC) c. Jumabhai Premchand (HUF) v/s CIT 243 ITR 812 (Guj.) I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 7 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 7.2. The assessee further submitted that in the case of Navnitial Zaveri reported in 125 ITR 385 (Guj) it was held that only because there was variatio…

ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 388/AHD/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

…conditions mentioned under the said section must be fulfilled. So long as the said conditions are not fulfilled penalty cannot be levied, which has been settled in the following cases: a. ACIT v/s Advance Film Club 45 TTJ 259 (AHD) b. ITO v/s Ambica Agencied 50 ITD 31 (Hyd) (SMC) c. Jumabhai Premchand (HUF) v/s CIT 243 ITR 812 (Guj.) I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 7 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 7.2. The assessee further submitted that in the case of Navnitial Zaveri reported in 125 ITR 385 (Guj) it was held that only because there was variatio…

ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 386/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

…conditions mentioned under the said section must be fulfilled. So long as the said conditions are not fulfilled penalty cannot be levied, which has been settled in the following cases: a. ACIT v/s Advance Film Club 45 TTJ 259 (AHD) b. ITO v/s Ambica Agencied 50 ITD 31 (Hyd) (SMC) c. Jumabhai Premchand (HUF) v/s CIT 243 ITR 812 (Guj.) I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 7 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 7.2. The assessee further submitted that in the case of Navnitial Zaveri reported in 125 ITR 385 (Guj) it was held that only because there was variatio…

The ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 379/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

…conditions mentioned under the said section must be fulfilled. So long as the said conditions are not fulfilled penalty cannot be levied, which has been settled in the following cases: a. ACIT v/s Advance Film Club 45 TTJ 259 (AHD) b. ITO v/s Ambica Agencied 50 ITD 31 (Hyd) (SMC) c. Jumabhai Premchand (HUF) v/s CIT 243 ITR 812 (Guj.) I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 7 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 7.2. The assessee further submitted that in the case of Navnitial Zaveri reported in 125 ITR 385 (Guj) it was held that only because there was variatio…

Sainy Heavy Elect & Engg. Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 10(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 8488/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri. Hari S. RahejaFor Respondent: Shri. Ravinder Sindhu
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…e absence of for imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) there should be an element of dishonesty on the part of the assessee which is not there in the present case. Further placing reliance on the cases Laxmi Jewellery vs. CIT 171 ITR 649(AP), ITO vs. Ambica Agencies 50 ITD 31 and CIT vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd.218 ITR 267 (Del) submitted that the findings of assessment proceedings are not conclusive for imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. And the assessee may establish its case during penalty proceedings also. 4. On the other hand the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) relying on the concurrent findings of the au…

ACIT v. Advance Film Club (50 ITD 31) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax