CIT v. Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co.

42 ITR 123Supreme Court of India1961#4872 most cited

What is CIT v. Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co. authority for?

Penalty is regarded as an additional tax imposed due to dishonest or contumacious conduct. A fee levied to deter late filing of TDS statements is also considered penal in nature and thus an additional tax.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co. · 42 ITR 123 (SC) · penalty as additional tax · dishonest conduct · contumacious conduct · section 234E · late fee TDS statements · penal in nature · additional tax

Sections most often in play

Section 156Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 119Section 143(1A)Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(1A)

Issues it is cited on

section 115wasection 234e(1)section 143(1a)section 285section 117section 139(9)tax collected at sourcesection 200a(1)(c)interest under section 201(1a)section 120section 200a(1)section 206c

Judgments citing CIT v. Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co.

SHRI BEERESHWAR CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD MADABHAVI,BELAGAVI vs. ITO WARD-2, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI

ITA 487/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 487/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Mr Shivanand Halbhavi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 80P(2)

…aling the quantum appeal is bad in law and violative of principle of natural justice?’ 6. In first place, it shall be purposive to quote that, ‘a penalty is levy of additional tax’ as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘CIT Vs Bikaji Dadabhai & Co.’ [1961, 42 ITR 123 (SC)] which their hon’ble lordships subsequently reiterated in ‘Jain Brothers Vs Union of India’ [1970, 77 ITR 107 (SC)]. In the light of aforestated judicial precedents, we are heedful to state that, the Ld. NFAC without first adjudicating the pending quantum appeal, that is to say without first determining the basic tax payable has proceeded to…

MAHAVEER SINGH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 840/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234FSection 263(1)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(b)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 44A

…urisdiction under section 263 to pass the order. The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Indian Pharmaceuticals after referring to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of C.A. Abraham v. ITO[1961] 41 ITR 425 and CIT v. Bheekha Bhai Dada Bhai [1961] 42 ITR 123 has held that the assessment does not mean only computation of income but consideration of all facts including the liability for penalty that may attract the provisions contained in section 271(1)(a) of the Act. It has further held that if in any proceeding for assessment the Income Tax Officer fails to take notice of the facts attracting the prov…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT LTD,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 480/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. ,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 479/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. ,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 478/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 477/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 476/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2377/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, CPC TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2368/PUN/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2367/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 200ASection 234E

…ent,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7\nLooking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2366/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2365/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2364/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2362/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2361/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2360/PUN/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2359/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…judgment, it is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras 21 & 22]. 2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in CIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the Supreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed upon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct (para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing the TDS statements in time can therefore also be…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2357/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2356/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

…ment,\nit is clear that section 234E does not violate any provision of the\nConstitution and is therefore intra vires, Constitution of India. [Paras\n21 & 22].\n2.7 Looking at the issue from another angle, the Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co in 42 ITR 123 (SC) has held that the\nSupreme Court has regarded penalty as an additional tax imposed\nupon a person in view of his dishonest or his contumacious conduct\n(para 9 thereto). In this view of the matter, the levy of fee u/s 234E of\nthe Act which was brought on to the statute to be a deterrent for filing\nthe TDS statements in time can therefore al…

VIKAS VIJAY GUPTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby\ndismissed

ITA 404/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA No. 404/Ahd/2024\nAssessment Year 2017-18\nVikas Vijay Gupta\nPrincipal Commissioner\n604 Sarap,\nof Income Tax,\nOpp. Navjivan Press Vs Ahmedabad-1,\nP.O. Navjivan,\nAhmedabad\nAhmedabad-380014,\nGujarat\n(Respondent)\nPAN: AEOPG6723L\n(Appellant)\nAssessee Represented: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R.\nRevenue Represented: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT-DR\nDate of hearing : 27-02-2025\nDate of pronouncement : 27-05-2025\nआदे

Section 115BSection 147Section 263Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 69A

…diction\nunder section 263 to pass the order. The Madhya Pradesh High Court\nin the case of Indian Pharmaceuticals after referring to the decision of\nthe Apex Court in the case of C.A. Abraham v. ITO[1961] 41 ITR 425\nand CIT v. Bheekha Bhai Dada Bhai [1961] 42 ITR 123 has held that the\nassessment does not mean only computation of income but\nconsideration of all facts including the liability for penalty that may\nattract the provisions contained in section 271(1)(a) of the Act. It has\nfurther held that if in any proceeding for assessment the Income Tax\nOfficer fails to take notice of the facts attracting the…

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co. (42 ITR 123) — Cited in 24 Judgments | BharatTax