Chandra Cement Ltd. v. DCIT 23 TW 160 (JP) and Hissariya Brothers

73 TTJ 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#25575 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 271D Section 271E

Judgments citing Chandra Cement Ltd. v. DCIT 23 TW 160 (JP) and Hissariya Brothers

Kanhiaya Lal Sain, Jaipur vs. JCIT Range-7 Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the Appeals of the appellant stands allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 1022/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 271Section 271DSection 271E

….2008 also Kindly refer Motilal Padampat Singhania 118 ITR 326(SC) followed in Veer Sales Corporation 50 TTJ 130 at 153, Dillu Cine Enterprises Ltd. v/s Ad. CIT 80 ITD 484 (Hyd.) also Chandra Cement Ltd. Vs. DCIT 23 TW 160 (JP) and Hissariya Brothers v/s JCIT 73 TTJ 1 (JD). 4.1 Covered matter: The Honble Raj. High Court in the case of CIT V/s Raj Kumar Sharma 294 ITR 131 (Raj.) It has been held that reasonable cause for the purpose of penalty u/s 271D- Tribunal having accepted that bonafide belief of the assessee that cash transaction below of Rs. 20,000/- did not attract penalty u/s 271D constituted reasonable c…

Shri Jaydeepsinh Vajesinh Dodiya, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt. C.I.T., Range-7(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, Ground number 2 of the assessee’s appeal is party allowed

ITA 2429/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. ParmarFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R

Section 269Section 269SSection 271Section 271DSection 275(1)(a)Section 275(1)(c)

…der u/s 271D of the Act is barred by limitation. The case laws cited by the assessee are distinguishable on facts, since in the case of CIT v Hissaria Brothers 386 ITR 719 (Supreme Court), CIT v Hissaria Brothers 291 ITR 244 (Raj) and Hissaria Brothers v JCIT 73 TTJ 1 (Jodhpur), on which I.T.A No. 2429/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No. 6 Shri Jaydeepsinh Vajesinh Dodiya vs. Jt. CIT reliance has been placed by the assessee, the assessing officer had initiated proceedings under section 271D of the Act during the course of assessment proceedings itself. However, after a few years the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax h…

ITO 5(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Modi Special Purpose Machines P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1358/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh: (A.Y : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Ketan L. VajaniFor Respondent: Suman Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 275(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : (A.Y : 2009-10) ITO-5(2)(3), Vs. M/s. Modi Special Purpose Mumbai (Appellant) Machines Pvt. Ltd., Block No. 3, Smruti, JUPD Road-11, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400 049 (Respondent) PAN : AADCM9385Q CO NO. 85/MUM/2015 : (A.Y : 2009-10) M/s. Modi Special Purpose Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Machines Pvt. Ltd., Kalyan (Respondent) Block No. 3, Smruti, JUPD Road-11, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400 049 PAN : AADCM9385Q (Cross Objector) Assessee by : Ketan L. Vajani Revenue by : Suman Kum…