CIT v. Amit Jain (351 ITR 74)

CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL TITAWI ,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD- 1(2), MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are

ITA 2615/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2612/Del/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Cane Deveopment Council बनाम Income Tax Officer, Rohana Kalan, Ward 1(2), Vs. C/O Dinesh Mohan, Advocate, Muzaffarnagar, 2-Anand Vihar, Lane No.1, Uttar Pradesh. Circular Road, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaalc0277F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 271(1)(c)

…AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 by following the order of order of Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs N.S. Committee in ITA No. 759 of 2012, copy of which is placed on record. The ld AR of the assessee also relied on the decision of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Amit Jain 351 ITR 74 (Delhi).The ld AR of the assessee fairly submits that the appeal in quantum assessment is still pending adjudication before tribunal and these appeal can be adjudicated independently. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have considered the rival submission of both the partie…

CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL ROHANA KALAN,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD- 1(2), MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are

ITA 2613/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2612/Del/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Cane Deveopment Council बनाम Income Tax Officer, Rohana Kalan, Ward 1(2), Vs. C/O Dinesh Mohan, Advocate, Muzaffarnagar, 2-Anand Vihar, Lane No.1, Uttar Pradesh. Circular Road, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaalc0277F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 271(1)(c)

…AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 by following the order of order of Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs N.S. Committee in ITA No. 759 of 2012, copy of which is placed on record. The ld AR of the assessee also relied on the decision of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Amit Jain 351 ITR 74 (Delhi).The ld AR of the assessee fairly submits that the appeal in quantum assessment is still pending adjudication before tribunal and these appeal can be adjudicated independently. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have considered the rival submission of both the partie…

CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL ROHANA KALAN,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD- 1(2), MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are

ITA 2612/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2612/Del/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Cane Deveopment Council बनाम Income Tax Officer, Rohana Kalan, Ward 1(2), Vs. C/O Dinesh Mohan, Advocate, Muzaffarnagar, 2-Anand Vihar, Lane No.1, Uttar Pradesh. Circular Road, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaalc0277F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 271(1)(c)

…AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 by following the order of order of Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs N.S. Committee in ITA No. 759 of 2012, copy of which is placed on record. The ld AR of the assessee also relied on the decision of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Amit Jain 351 ITR 74 (Delhi).The ld AR of the assessee fairly submits that the appeal in quantum assessment is still pending adjudication before tribunal and these appeal can be adjudicated independently. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have considered the rival submission of both the partie…

SACHIN ,HISAR vs. DCIT. CENTAL CIRTCLE-7 , DELHI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are

ITA 2613/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2612/Del/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Cane Deveopment Council बनाम Income Tax Officer, Rohana Kalan, Ward 1(2), Vs. C/O Dinesh Mohan, Advocate, Muzaffarnagar, 2-Anand Vihar, Lane No.1, Uttar Pradesh. Circular Road, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaalc0277F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 271(1)(c)

…AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 by following the order of order of Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs N.S. Committee in ITA No. 759 of 2012, copy of which is placed on record. The ld AR of the assessee also relied on the decision of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Amit Jain 351 ITR 74 (Delhi).The ld AR of the assessee fairly submits that the appeal in quantum assessment is still pending adjudication before tribunal and these appeal can be adjudicated independently. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have considered the rival submission of both the partie…

THE DCIT, (INTL. TAXN.), RAJKOT vs. M/S. KOREA SOUTH EAST POWER CO. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 132/RJT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit (Intl. Taxn.) M/S.Korea South East Power Amruta Estate Co.Ltd. Room No.312 Mg Road बनाम/ C/O. P.V. Page & Co., Girnar Cinema 201, Sardar Griha, 198 L.T. Marg Vs. Rajkot Mumbai – 400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Pan : Ahvps 3555Q Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15/12/2023

Section 115ASection 271(1)(c)Section 44B

…te disclosure of income had been made in the return of income and head of the income undergoes a change at the hands of the Assessing Officer would not by itself justify the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act". CIT v. Amit Jain - (2013) 351 ITR 74 - Delhi HC: "Section 271(1)(c), read with sections 28(i) and 45, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Penalty For concealment of income (Bona fide claim) - Assessee declared an income as short term capital gain Assessing Officer, however, treated said income as income from business - He also levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) on ground that assessee ha…

USK HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 27(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6426/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 24(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…ge of furnishing 4 Inaccurate Particulars of Income charged by the assessing officer is arbitrary, unjust and against the facts and circumstances. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74(Delhi). The addition made by Assessing Officer is due to difference of opinion and the assessee is under the bonafide belief that the said income is rental income and the same is to be assessed under the head of Income from House Property, whereas the Assessing Officer is of the view that the receipt is to be taxed under the head of Income from Ot…

THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 2834/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Naina Soin Kapil,Senior DR

Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…nal Airport (P.) Ltd. (2018) 89 taxmann.com 326 (Delhi – Trib.), Ganesh Land Organisation vs. CIT 168 ITR 527, 6 ITA Nos.2830 to 2834/Del./2015 CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158, PCIT vs. Samtel Ltd. ITA No.43 of 2017 & CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74. 7. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue in order to repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee relied upon the order passed by the AO/ld. CIT (A) and contended inter alia that Totgar’s Cooperative Sale Society’s case (supra) is squarely applicable to this case; that when assessee has made a wrong claim of deduct…

THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 2833/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Naina Soin Kapil,Senior DR

Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…nal Airport (P.) Ltd. (2018) 89 taxmann.com 326 (Delhi – Trib.), Ganesh Land Organisation vs. CIT 168 ITR 527, 6 ITA Nos.2830 to 2834/Del./2015 CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158, PCIT vs. Samtel Ltd. ITA No.43 of 2017 & CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74. 7. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue in order to repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee relied upon the order passed by the AO/ld. CIT (A) and contended inter alia that Totgar’s Cooperative Sale Society’s case (supra) is squarely applicable to this case; that when assessee has made a wrong claim of deduct…

THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 2832/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Naina Soin Kapil,Senior DR

Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…nal Airport (P.) Ltd. (2018) 89 taxmann.com 326 (Delhi – Trib.), Ganesh Land Organisation vs. CIT 168 ITR 527, 6 ITA Nos.2830 to 2834/Del./2015 CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158, PCIT vs. Samtel Ltd. ITA No.43 of 2017 & CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74. 7. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue in order to repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee relied upon the order passed by the AO/ld. CIT (A) and contended inter alia that Totgar’s Cooperative Sale Society’s case (supra) is squarely applicable to this case; that when assessee has made a wrong claim of deduct…

THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 2831/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Naina Soin Kapil,Senior DR

Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…nal Airport (P.) Ltd. (2018) 89 taxmann.com 326 (Delhi – Trib.), Ganesh Land Organisation vs. CIT 168 ITR 527, 6 ITA Nos.2830 to 2834/Del./2015 CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158, PCIT vs. Samtel Ltd. ITA No.43 of 2017 & CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74. 7. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue in order to repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee relied upon the order passed by the AO/ld. CIT (A) and contended inter alia that Totgar’s Cooperative Sale Society’s case (supra) is squarely applicable to this case; that when assessee has made a wrong claim of deduct…

THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 2830/DEL/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Naina Soin Kapil,Senior DR

Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…nal Airport (P.) Ltd. (2018) 89 taxmann.com 326 (Delhi – Trib.), Ganesh Land Organisation vs. CIT 168 ITR 527, 6 ITA Nos.2830 to 2834/Del./2015 CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158, PCIT vs. Samtel Ltd. ITA No.43 of 2017 & CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74. 7. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue in order to repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee relied upon the order passed by the AO/ld. CIT (A) and contended inter alia that Totgar’s Cooperative Sale Society’s case (supra) is squarely applicable to this case; that when assessee has made a wrong claim of deduct…

R. G. COLONISERS P LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 931/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Madhukar Garg (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

…ars of income or concealment of particulars of income. He has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Amit Jain, 351 ITR 74 (Delhi). The ld. A/R has also relied on a series of decisions on this point that once the assessee has disclosed all the relevant facts and details at the time of filing the return income as well as during the course of assessment proceedings, then the claim of the assessee was not accepted by the AO would not ipso facto amount to furnishing of…

SHALLU BANSAL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 30/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 30/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shallu Bansal Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Plot No.1497-B Vs Ahmedabad. Opp: Theosophical Lodge Rupani Circle Bhavnagar 364 001. Pan : Aijpb 8274 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.R. Popat, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Popat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr.DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 80C

…e taxes on this addition, only to that extent penalty could be computed. In support of his contentions, he relied upon the following decisions: i) Simran Singh Gambhir Vs. DDIT (International Taxation), 69 taxmann.com 357 (Delhi-Trib); ii) CIT Vs. Amit Jain, 351 ITR 74 (Delhi); ITA No.30 /Ahd/2017 iii) CIT Vs. Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd., 33 taxmann.com 227 (Bom) 6. On the other hand, the ld.DR relied upon the orders of the Revenue authorities. 7. We have duly considered rival submissions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-clause (iii) of section 271(1)(c) of the Act has direct bearing on the controver…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MASTER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1092/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Karan Kumra, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ppellant has relied upon the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme (2010) 322 ITR 158 and other decisions cited and mentioned in the submissions of the appellant. The contentions of the appellant are also covered in its favour by the judgments in CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74 ((Del) and Principal C.I.T. v. G.K. Properties (P) Ltd 377 ITR 417 (T&AP). In CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd. (supra) and M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC) and the decision of Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai in M/s. Vidhya Synthetic (I) Pvt. Ltd. v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ITA no. 3647/Mum./2011-Assessmen…