CIT v. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company

294 ITR 134High Court2007#8379 most cited

What is CIT v. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company authority for?

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied merely because expenditure was huge or some vouchers were not available, without further evidence suggesting the claim was not bonafide or that inadmissible expenses were claimed. Non-submission of proper vouchers for expenditure does not automatically amount to concealment of income.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company · 294 ITR 134 · section 271(1)(c) · concealment of income · penalty proceedings · disallowance · bonafide expenditure · voucher not available · Dilip N. Shroff

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 154

Issues it is cited on

concealment of incomesection 271(1)section 271section 271(1)(c)section 27

Judgments citing CIT v. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company

Ayyappankavu Chandrasekharan Vijayalakshmi, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-14(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2136/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2136/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ayyappankavu Chandrasekharan Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vijayalakshmi, 4, Thiruvengadam Income Tax, Street, West Mambalam, Corporate Circle 14(1), Chennai 600 033. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aadpv3516D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.05.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. We Find That This Appeal Was Filed With A Delay Of 22 Days. On Perusal Of The Petition Filed In Support Of Notarized Affidavit, Submissions Of The Ld. Ar & Ld. Dr, We Find The Reasons Explained By The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri R. Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

…inable for non- furnishing the details as the assessee truly disclosed the transaction of the sale consideration and disclosed long term capital gains. The ld. AR argued that the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, in the case of CIT v. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Co. 294 ITR 134 (Mad), held that no penalty is maintainable for want of evidence. 3 I.T.A. No.2136/Chny/24 5. On careful reading of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT v. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Co. (supra), wherein, it was held that for non-submissions of proper voucher for the expenditure incurred could not amount to concealm…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Pacl Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2884/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, however, Assessing Officer rejected the same and proceeded to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.12,51,51,671/- which is 100% of the tax sought to be evaded.

Section 132Section 133ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ings and the AO has to be examine these evidences. In this connection, reference may be made to the ratio laid down in the following cases: i) JK Jajoo v CIT 181 ITR 410(MP) ii) CII v Ajay Hari Dalmia 157 ITR 145 (Del) iii) Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company 294 ITR 134 (Mad) iv) Jain Bros v Union of India 771 ITR 107 (SC) v) Valmikhbhai H. Patel 280 ITR 487 (Guj) As far as brokerage/commission are concerned, all the details are available with the assessee and the vouchers for the payment for brokerage and commission also exit. All the PAN nos are available and tax has been deducted at source. There is no rea…

Sanjeev Kumar Goyal, Hapur vs. ITO Ward-3(5), Hapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3186/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14 Sanjeev Kumar Goyal Vs. Ito Ward-3(5) 607, Railway Road, Hapur. Patel Nagar, Hapur Uttar Pradesh 245101 Pan Aatpg1790N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ot justify levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Following guideline from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC), Hon’ble Madras High Court decided in CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Co. (2007) 294 ITR 134(Mad) that disallowance on the ground that the expenditure was huge or that some vouchers were not available is not good enough to justify penalty in absence of anything more to suggest that the claim was not bonafide. There is no evidence in the case of the assessee that the claim was malafide. There is nothing on record that inadmissible expense…

Mangesh Jaywant Borse, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 20(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is hereby Allowed

ITA 635/MUM/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.635/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2001-02) Shri Mangesh Jaywant Borse Income Tax Officer Ward बनाम/ 4, New Neelam 20(2)(2) Vs. Machlimmare, Versova Road 6Th Floor, Piramal Andheri (W), Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagab9277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Reepal TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(2)

…in view of the law settled by the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in case of M/s. Naman Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.5546&5490/M/2009 for the A.Y.2003-04 and Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Co. 294 ITR 134 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158. 6. Considering the specific facts and circumstances of the present case wherein it came into the notice that the assessment of the assessee was earlier completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 13.05.2003 without initiation the penalty and the penalty proceed…

K.Sundararaj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 936/CHNY/2014[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2015AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

ACIT, Chennai vs. K.Sundaraj, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 955/CHNY/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

ACIT, Chennai vs. K.Sundaraj, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 954/CHNY/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

K.Sundararaj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 942/CHNY/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2015AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

K.Sundararaj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 941/CHNY/2014[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2015AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

K.Sundararaj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 940/CHNY/2014[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2015AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

K.Sundararaj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 939/CHNY/2014[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2015AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

K.Sundararaj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 938/CHNY/2014[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2015AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

K.Sundararaj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 937/CHNY/2014[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2015AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…sustainable in law, by itself will not amount I.T.A.Nos.936 to 942/Mds/14 :- 6 -: & ITA Nos. 954, 955/Mds/2014. to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. He also relied in the case of CIT vs. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company, 294 ITR 134, wherein expenses having been recorded in assessee’s book, failure to produce supporting voucher by itself would not constitute concealment attracting penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Further, he also relied in the case of CIT vs. Chennupati Tyres & Rubber Product 90 CCH 191 (APHC) wherein it was held that when there was no intention on the…

CIT v. Cafco Syndicate Shipping Company (294 ITR 134) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax