What is Babuji Jacob v. ITO authority for?

A penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) is vitiated if the show cause notice issued under Section 274 fails to specify the exact charge against the assessee by not striking out the inapplicable portions, thereby denying clear communication of the specific default (concealment or inaccurate particulars). The entire penalty proceedings, including the penalty order, are rendered invalid in such a scenario.

How many judgments cite Babuji Jacob v. ITO?

74 judgments on BharatTax cite Babuji Jacob v. ITO (430 ITR 259), spanning 2021 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Babuji Jacob v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 274, Section 271(1)(c), Section 143(3), Section 132, Section 153A, Section 139(1).

Babuji Jacob v. ITO (430 ITR 259)

D.Srinivas Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2691/CHNY/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 271(1)(c)

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…

DCIT, CC-3 (2), Chennai vs. Vicoans Infrstructure Environmental Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3170/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3170/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 V. The Dy. Commissioner Of- M/S.Vicoans Infrastructure Income Tax, Environmental Engineering Corporate Circle-3(2), Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. No.39, 1St Cross Street, West Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. [Pan:Aaccv 4087 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"", एवं डॉ। दीपक पी. "रपोटे, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.3170/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 v. The Dy. Commissioner of- M/s.Vicoans Infrastructure Income Tax, Environmental Engineering Corporate Circle-3(2), Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. No.39, 1st Cross Street, West CIT Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. [PAN:AACCV 4087 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Department by : Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCI…

Shri R. Sathiamurthy, Chidambaram vs. ITO, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2197/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…as not raised the issue but was raised for the first time after 10 years. Subsequently, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the Hon’ble Madras High Court has clarified the decision of Gangotri Textiles Ltd., in the case of Babuji Jacob vs. ITO, [2021] 430 ITR 259 and noted in para 31 & 32 that the facts in Gangotri Textiles Ltd., and Sundaram Finance Ltd., were on different factual position wherein the court rejected the plea of the assessee as regards to the argument of validity of notice, which was raised for the first time before Hon’ble High Court and not before the lower authorities. The relevant obs…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 912/CHNY/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 911/CHNY/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 910/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 909/CHNY/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 908/CHNY/2020[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 907/CHNY/2020[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 906/CHNY/2020[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 905/CHNY/2020[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. 271(1)(c) of the Act and submitted that no specific charge was made against the assessee which would vitiate the penalty proceedings as per settled legal position. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Babuji Jacob vs ITO (430 ITR 259) as well as the decision of Hon’ble ITA Nos.905 to 912/Chny/2020 Bombay High Court in PCIT V/s Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation (P.) Ltd (272 Taxman 157) against which revenue’s Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. 3.2 The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relie…

Sh. Prem Pal Gandhi, Nawanshahr vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 455/ASR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar04 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR

Section 2(22)(e)Section 27Section 271Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 455/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Sh. Prem Pal Gandhi, Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income K.C. Tower, Chandigarh Tax, Central Circle-II, Jalandhar Road, Nawanshahar [PAN: AAQPG 6508D] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None (Written submission) Respondent by: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 28.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 13.05.2022 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the im…

Smt. Chidambaram Lathadevi, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 3 (5), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1564/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…f the assessee. 5.1 The ld.counsel for the assessee, further stated that even now the issue of Gangotri Textiles Ltd., supra, of Hon’ble Madras High Court has been considered by the Hon’ble Madras High Court further in the case of Babuji Jacob vs. ITO, [2021] 430 ITR 259 and has distinguished Sundaram Finance Ltd., vs. ACIT, [2018] 93 taxmann.com 250 and observed in para 32 and 33 as under:- I.T.A. No.1564/Chny/2018 5 32. The decision of this Court in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd., was couched on a different factual position wherein the Court rejected the plea of the assessee, which was a limited company, wh…

Presidency Kid Leather Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 765/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 765/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 Presidency Kid Leather Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of 21, Spartan Nagar, 1St Floor, Vs. Income Tax, Mogappair East, Chennai 600 037. Corporate Circle 5(2), [Pan:Aaacp1952D] Chennai 34. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Chennai, Dated 31.01.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14 Challenging The Appellate Order Of Confirming The Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘बी” "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 765/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 Presidency Kid Leather Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner of 21, Spartan Nagar, 1st Floor, Vs. Income Tax, Mogappair East, Chennai 600 037. Corporate Circle 5(2), [PAN:AAACP1952D] Chennai 34. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर स…

Babuji Jacob v. ITO

What is Babuji Jacob v. ITO authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Babuji Jacob v. ITO

D.Srinivas Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

DCIT, CC-3 (2), Chennai vs. Vicoans Infrstructure Environmental Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

Shri R. Sathiamurthy, Chidambaram vs. ITO, Cuddalore

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT CC4(2), Chennai

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

Sh. Prem Pal Gandhi, Nawanshahr vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- II, Jalandhar

Smt. Chidambaram Lathadevi, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 3 (5), Chennai

Presidency Kid Leather Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai