CIT v. Amarnath

143 CTR 148Reported decision#13418 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing CIT v. Amarnath

M/S Industrial Filters & Fabrics Pvt.Ltd., Indore vs. The JCIT, R-5 (Present AO: DCIT 2(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 961/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…(166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) It was held that no case of levy of penalty can be made where two opinions are possible on same facts. 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) It was held that no penalty could be levied when two views are possible. 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Ma…

M/S Industrial Filters & Fabrics Private Limited, Indore vs. The ACIT 2(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 753/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…(166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) It was held that no case of levy of penalty can be made where two opinions are possible on same facts. 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) It was held that no penalty could be levied when two views are possible. 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Ma…

M/S Industrial Filters & Fabrics Private Limited, Indore vs. The ACIT 2(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 752/IND/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…(166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) It was held that no case of levy of penalty can be made where two opinions are possible on same facts. 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) It was held that no penalty could be levied when two views are possible. 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Ma…

M/S Industrial Filters & Fabrics Private Limited, Indore vs. The ACIT-2(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 293/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…(166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) It was held that no case of levy of penalty can be made where two opinions are possible on same facts. 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) It was held that no penalty could be levied when two views are possible. 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Ma…

M/S Industrial Filters and Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The Addl. CIT- Range-5, Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 484/IND/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…(166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) It was held that no case of levy of penalty can be made where two opinions are possible on same facts. 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) It was held that no penalty could be levied when two views are possible. 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Ma…

M/S Industrial Filters & Fabrics Private Limited, Indore vs. The ACIT 2(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 754/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…(166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) It was held that no case of levy of penalty can be made where two opinions are possible on same facts. 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) It was held that no penalty could be levied when two views are possible. 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Ma…

M/S Industrial Filters and Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT 5(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 404/IND/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…(166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) CIT Vs. Calcutta Credit Corporation (166 ITR 29) (Cal.) It was held that no case of levy of penalty can be made where two opinions are possible on same facts. 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) 3. 3. CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) CIT Vs. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) (All.) It was held that no penalty could be levied when two views are possible. 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) 4. 4. CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Mad.) CIT Vs. Sivananda Steels (256 ITR 683) (Ma…

CIT v. Amarnath (143 CTR 148) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax