Asstt. CIT v. Mrs. N. Meenakshi

125 TTJ 856Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#22920 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115WDSection 115WESection 142Section 142(2A)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

Judgments citing Asstt. CIT v. Mrs. N. Meenakshi

SHARDA DEVI,ALWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1213/JPR/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Feb 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalsharda Devi, 421, Lohia Padi, Alwar- 301001. Pan No.:Adkpd7161J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward- 1(4), Alwar. ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Kranti Mehta, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT, DR
Section 115WSection 142Section 143(3)Section 143oSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V/s Reliance Petro products Pvt. Ltd (supra), the penalty levied u/s 271(1) (c) is not sustainable. The same is deleted.” It has been held in cases of Asstt. CIT v. Mrs. N. Meenakshi [2009] 125 TTJ 856 (Chennai), Prakash Chand Nahar v. ITO [2010] 110 TTJ 886 (Jodh.) and Balkrishna Waghere, July/ Aug, 2010, BCAJ, 3 (Pune) that penalty cannot be levied in cases where addition has been made on the basis of provisions of section 50C of the Act, as there is no 'concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars'. This view has also been upheld by t…

ITO, CHENNAI vs. A.JAGANNATHAN, COIMBATORE

In the result, both, the appeal and the cross-objection stand dismissed

ITA 345/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Aroraआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.345/Mds/2017 & C.O. No.42/Mds/2017 (In I.T.A. No.345/Mds/2017) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Deepan Raj Krishna, Advocate
Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी संजय अरोड़ा, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.345/Mds/2017 & C.O. No.42/Mds/2017 (in I.T.A. No.345/Mds/2017) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Income Tax Officer, Shri A. Jagannathan, Non Corporate Ward - 2(5), v. 50A, Palanisamy Street, 63-A, Race Course Road, No.2, Sai Baba Colony, Coimbatore. K.K. Pudur, Coimbatore – 641 038. PAN : ADAPJ 9812 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent…

SHAILENDRA R. SHINDE,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5540/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5540/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Shri Shailendra R. Shinde Ito-22(3)(4), बिधम/ Room No.-07, Ramashray Society, Mumbai. Plot No.21, Sector-19, Nerul Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 706. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं ./Pan/Gir No. Bckps 53892R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : None प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke
Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5540/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Shri Shailendra R. Shinde ITO-22(3)(4), बिधम/ Room No.-07, Ramashray Society, Mumbai. Plot No.21, Sector-19, Nerul Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 706. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं ./PAN/GIR No. BCKPS 53892R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : None प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 21/07/2016 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : 27.7.2016 Date of Pronoun…