What is CIT v. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd. authority for?

A penalty under Section 271D for violating Section 269SS can be waived if the assessee proves there was a reasonable cause for the violation, demonstrating no intent to evade tax or engage in tax planning.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd.?

38 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd. (301 ITR 328), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 271D, Section 143(1), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 269SS, Section 271E.

CIT v. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd. (301 ITR 328)

HARI KRISHNA LEELA PRASAD PALADUGU,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 798/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

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

…precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Assistant Director of Income Tax Vs. Kumar A.B. Shanti (255 ITR 258) and the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bombay Conductors and Electricals Ltd. (301 ITR 328). 3. The A.O., after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taking note of the fact that, the assessee has violated provisions of Section 269SS of the Act, and more particularly, the amended provisions of the Act with effect from 01.06.2015, observed that, the contention of the assessee that, the subsequent payments date back to th…

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

…arious dates aggregate to Rs. 90,000/- the finding of the Tribunal could not be grossly perverse. Also refer CIT v/s Maheshwari Nirman Udyog 302 ITR 201(Raj.) This ratio is also applicable for repaid i.e 271E 4.2 In CIT v/s Bombay Conductors & Electrical Ltd. 301 ITR 328 (Guj) it has been held that there is no evidence on record to show that infraction of the provision was with the knowledge or in defiance of the provisions that there is nothing on record to indicate that the assessee had indulged in any tax planning or tax evasion, that by making the book entries by converting outstanding purchases price in to l…

SHRI SANJAYKUMAR HARIBHAI PATEL ,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-4(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 1762/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1762/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Sanjaykumar Haribhai Patel, A.C.I.T, 401, Shubham Complex, Vs. Range-4(1), Opp. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Alqpp3785L

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R

Section 250Section 269TSection 271ESection 271tSection 273B

…ich are inevitable under the specific circumstances. Furthermore, the adjustments through the accounting entries have been accepted by the Hon’ble courts i.e. the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd reported in 301 ITR 328 has accepted the accounting entries by way adjustments as a valid mode of payment and therefore the genuineness of the Asstt. Year 2014-15 4 transaction cannot be doubted. Accordingly, there cannot be any penalty under the provisions of section 271E in pursuance to the provisions of section 273B of the Act. 9.2 Likewise, the Hon’ble Delhi High…

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. MACROTECH CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result , both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1415/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271D

…l in Triumph International Finance (I) Ltd. in FTA No. 542/Mum/2007, dated M/s. Macrotech Developers Limited (Successor to Macrotech Construction P. Ltd., ) 29.01.2008; ix) Judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd (301 ITR 328), rendered on 11.02.2008; (x) Order of Ahmedabad Bench of Hon'ble Tribunal in Jitu Builders (P) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [124 ITD 134 (Ahd) (TM)], dated 16.07.2009; and (xi) Order of Ahmedabad Bench of Hon'ble Tribunal in ACIT v. Western India Ceramics (P.) Ltd (20 taxmann. Com 317), dated 12.10.2010. 10. It was argued by learned DR that the Hon'ble Hig…

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. LODHA HOME DEVELOPERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 617/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2009-10