ACIT v. Smt. Surinder Kaur

120 TTJ 618Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#6043 most cited
19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271AABSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 276csection 276section 40a(ia)section 270a(2)section 142(2a)section 92dunder-reporting of incomesection 271aabpenalty u/s 270apenalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particularspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing ACIT v. Smt. Surinder Kaur

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1055/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

…see is well within his right to take this defence of\nchallenging the assessment order even though assessment\norder has not been challenged, at the time of challenging the\npenalty order.\n12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt.\nSurinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the\nidentical circumstances in favour of the assessee, which is\napplicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. So,\nwhen the foundation of addition on unaccounted income of\nRs.4,95,000/-, though not challenged by the assessee, is not\nsustainable in the eyes of law, the question of imposing\npenalty qua t…

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1054/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…ot been challenged, at the time of challenging the penalty order. penalty order. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the identical circumstances in identical circumstances in favour of the assessee, which is favour of the assessee, which is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. So, applicable t…

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1053/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…ot been challenged, at the time of challenging the penalty order. penalty order. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the identical circumstances in identical circumstances in favour of the assessee, which is favour of the assessee, which is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. So, applicable t…

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DICT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1052/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…ot been challenged, at the time of challenging the penalty order. penalty order. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the identical circumstances in identical circumstances in favour of the assessee, which is favour of the assessee, which is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. So, applicable t…

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1051/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…ot been challenged, at the time of challenging the penalty order. penalty order. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. 12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the identical circumstances in identical circumstances in favour of the assessee, which is favour of the assessee, which is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. So, applicable t…

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014-15 to AY\n2020-21 are partly allowed

ITA 1050/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

…see is well within his right to take this defence of\nchallenging the assessment order even though assessment\norder has not been challenged, at the time of challenging the\npenalty order.\n12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt.\nSurinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the\nidentical circumstances in favour of the assessee, which is\napplicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. So,\nwhen the foundation of addition on unaccounted income of\nRs.4,95,000/-, though not challenged by the assessee, is not\nsustainable in the eyes of law, the question of imposing\npenalty qua t…

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014-15 to AY\n2020-21 are partly allowed

ITA 1049/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

…see is well within his right to take this defence of\nchallenging the assessment order even though assessment\norder has not been challenged, at the time of challenging the\npenalty order.\n12. Coordinate Bench in the case entitled ACIT Vs Smt.\nSurinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618 decided the identical issue in the\nidentical circumstances in favour of the assessee, which is\napplicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. So,\nwhen the foundation of addition on unaccounted income of\nRs.4,95,000/-, though not challenged by the assessee, is not\nsustainable in the eyes of law, the question of imposing\npenalty qua t…

M/S. RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

ITA 760/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S. RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 485/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S. RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 484/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

ITA 1619/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

ITA 1618/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

ITA 1617/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

ITA 1616/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

ITA 1615/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

M/S RELIANCE ESTATE AGENCY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

ITA 1614/DEL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita Tripathi
Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…erefore, assumption of jurisdiction is illegal and void abinitio. The assessee-firm relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341 and Order of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. The A.O. 7 ITA.Nos.1614 to 1619/Del./2011, 484/Del./2014, 760/Del./2016, 485/Del./2014 M/s. Reliance Estate Agency, Faridabad. did not bring any evidence on record that the documents found during the course of search belong to the assessee-firm. Several decisions in support of the above contention were also relied upon. The Ld. CIT(A), howe…

ROOP KISHANCHAND KHEMANI,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 31, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 3944/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & C.N. Prasad (Jm)

Section 132Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…d not result in levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act as held by Delhi bench of Tribunal in the case of Dr. Kaushal Goel Vs. ACIT (2015)(45 CCH 0363 Del), wherein the decision rendered by Lucknow bench of Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Smt Surinder Kaur (120 TTJ 618) was followed. 16. On merits, the Ld A.R submitted that the assessing officer has not invoked the provisions of Explanation 5A of the Act. He submitted that the assessees have submitted that they were under bonafide belief that the income earned outside India is not taxable in India. When the revenue confronted with US $ 751754, the assessees ha…

SHRI KUMAR SATUR NATHANI,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 31, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 3942/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & C.N. Prasad (Jm)

Section 132Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…d not result in levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act as held by Delhi bench of Tribunal in the case of Dr. Kaushal Goel Vs. ACIT (2015)(45 CCH 0363 Del), wherein the decision rendered by Lucknow bench of Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Smt Surinder Kaur (120 TTJ 618) was followed. 16. On merits, the Ld A.R submitted that the assessing officer has not invoked the provisions of Explanation 5A of the Act. He submitted that the assessees have submitted that they were under bonafide belief that the income earned outside India is not taxable in India. When the revenue confronted with US $ 751754, the assessees ha…

DR. KAUSHAL GOEL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5249/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rishpal Bedi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 3

…not sustainable in the eyes of law being without jurisdiction; that in the penalty proceedings assessee has also challenged the assessment 4 proceedings and relied upon the orders passed by ITAT, Lucknow ‘A’ Bench in case entitled ACIT Vs Smt. Surinder Kaur 120 TTJ 618. 7. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. repelled the arguments advanced by the Ld. A.R. for the Assessee and contended that once the assessee has reflected the surrendered amount in his return of income, Revenue is justified in imposing the penalty which is chargeable in the given circumstances. 8. It is settled principle of law that penalty proceedings…