How many judgments cite CIT v. Bank of Nova Scotia?

55 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bank of Nova Scotia (380 ITR 550), spanning 2017 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bank of Nova Scotia come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 194C, Section 201(1A), Section 271C, Section 273B, Section 10(20), Section 10(46).

CIT v. Bank of Nova Scotia

380 ITR 550Supreme Court of India2016#2093 most cited

What is CIT v. Bank of Nova Scotia authority for?

Penalty under Section 271C for failure to deduct tax is not leviable if the assessee acted under a bona fide belief and without contumacious conduct.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bank of Nova Scotia · penalty under Section 271C · failure to deduct tax · bona fide belief · no contumacious conduct · Section 273B · TDS default penalty · non-levy of penalty · Section 201(1A) interest

Sections most often in play

Section 194C Section 201(1A)Section 271C Section 273B Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11 Section 12

Issues it is cited on

compensatory interest section 206a section 206aa section 10(46)section 10(20)section 271c section 197a section 194c section 201(1a)interest under section 201(1a)section 273b section 197

Judgments citing CIT v. Bank of Nova Scotia

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH), UDAIPUR

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 114/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the said demand by stating that the VFPMCs are not contractors under Section 194C, as they are formed under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953, and function as self-help groups for forest conservation and development. The payments made to VFPMCs are not contract payments but are reimbursements for work done under the joint forest management policy of the State Government.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 80P

…e, even if it is assumed that tax is required to be deducted on EDC but not deducted under bonafide belief that the provisions contained u/s 271C are not attracted, no penalty can be levied. 14. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia 380 ITR 550 upheld the findings returned by the tribunal that, “if there is no contumacious conduct of the assessee, penalty u/s 271C cannot be levied.” Operative part of the judgment supra is extracted for ready perusal as under :- "2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide orde…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SOUTH, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 113/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 80P

SHYAM COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-77, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2020/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad:Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 119Section 194CSection 196Section 271C

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under: “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/s…

ITO WARD-77(3), NEW DELHI vs. STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue/Department stands dismissed

ITA 1236/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon'hle Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon'hle Court has held as under: “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/s 2…

ITO(TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 360/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…e, even if it is assumed that tax is required to be deducted on EDC but not deducted under bonafide belief that the provisions contained u/s 271C are not attracted, no penalty can be levied. 14. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia 380 ITR 550 upheld the findings returned by the tribunal that, “if there is no contumacious conduct of the assessee, penalty u/s 271C cannot Income Tax Officer (TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer be levied.” Operative part of the judgment supra is extracted for ready perusal as under :- "2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appell…

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 359/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…e, even if it is assumed that tax is required to be deducted on EDC but not deducted under bonafide belief that the provisions contained u/s 271C are not attracted, no penalty can be levied. 14. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia 380 ITR 550 upheld the findings returned by the tribunal that, “if there is no contumacious conduct of the assessee, penalty u/s 271C cannot Income Tax Officer (TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer be levied.” Operative part of the judgment supra is extracted for ready perusal as under :- "2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appell…

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 358/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…e, even if it is assumed that tax is required to be deducted on EDC but not deducted under bonafide belief that the provisions contained u/s 271C are not attracted, no penalty can be levied. 14. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia 380 ITR 550 upheld the findings returned by the tribunal that, “if there is no contumacious conduct of the assessee, penalty u/s 271C cannot Income Tax Officer (TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer be levied.” Operative part of the judgment supra is extracted for ready perusal as under :- "2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appell…

VIRESH PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7436/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7436/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271C

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/s…

DCIT CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI vs. OMAXE LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue/Department stands

ITA 9282/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 194CSection 250Section 271C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2015-16] DCIT, Circle-76(1), Vs M/s Omaxe Limited, new Delhi-110019 7, Local Shopping Centre, Near Post Office, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019. PAN/TAN:AAACO0171H/DE LO01861G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by: Sh. Yuvraj Singh, Adv. Department represented by: Sh. Jitender Chand, Sr. DR Date of hearing 05.01.2023 Date of pronouncement 30 .01.2023 O R D E R PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: The Revenue/Department has preferred the instan…

ITO, TDS WARD 74(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI POLICE, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals of revenue are disposed of

ITA 8064/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri J K Handa, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan Sr.DR

Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 274

…of the Act. The learned AR also submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly noted that the appellants conduct is not contumacious penalty cannot be levied u/s. 271C of the Act, as per judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia 380 ITR 550 (SC) and judgement of Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs ITOCHU Corp., reported as 268 ITR 172 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Mistui & Co. Ltd., reported as 272 ITR 545. 5. On careful consideration above submissions from the first appellate order we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has granted the relief to the assessee with following…

ITO, TDS, WARD-74(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI POLICE, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals of revenue are disposed of

ITA 8063/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri J K Handa, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan Sr.DR

Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 274

REGARDS DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6535/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 6535/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Regards Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 895, Nai Sarak, Range-78, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccr5651D Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.11.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271CSection 40

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under: “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: 9 Regards Developers Pvt. Ltd. "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not de…

PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE 76, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and penalty imposed by the A

ITA 6262/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 6262/Del/2019 (A.Y 2017-18)

Section 143(3)Section 271

…e under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 10 Pivotal Infrastructure Ltd. the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax…

SHREE VARDHMAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT RANGE-77, NEW DELHI

ITA 1957/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmashree Vardhman Developers Vs. Jcit, Private Limited, Range-77 301-311, Indraprakash Building, New Delhi 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan : Aaccv1495M Appellant Respondent

Section 156Section 194CSection 250Section 271CSection 273B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shree Vardhman Developers Vs. JCIT, Private Limited, Range-77 301-311, Indraprakash Building, New Delhi 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi PAN : AACCV1495M Appellant Respondent Assessee by Ms. Gunjan Jain, Adv. Revenue by Sh. Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 07.11.2022 ORDER Per Anubhav Sharma, JM : The assessee has filed this appeal against the order dated 12.10.2020 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New…

SIRUR DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT(TDS), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1164/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Present on behalf of Shri Alok Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal

Section 271C

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/…

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5872/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: [CIT] - D. R

Section 196Section 271C

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/s…

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5871/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: [CIT] - D. R

Section 196Section 271C

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/s…

TDI REALCON PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5769/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal

Section 196Section 271C

…nder section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully 6 I.T.A.Nos.5768 & 5769/Del/2019 supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/s…

TDI REALCON PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5768/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal

Section 196Section 271C

VIPUL LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 1856/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Vipul Ltd., Vs. Acit Vipul Tech Square, Golf Circle-26(2) Course Road, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122009 Pan : Aaaca5396C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 196Section 40

…then no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Act as there was no contumacious conduct by the assessee. Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “2. The matter was pursued by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.03.2006 entered the following findings: "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case we are not dealing with collection of tax u/s…

Showing 1–20 of 55 · Page 1 of 3