How many judgments cite CIT v. Hanuman Rice Mills?

13 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), spanning 2017 to 2024.

CIT v. Hanuman Rice Mills

275 ITR 79Reported decision2005#8364 most cited

What is CIT v. Hanuman Rice Mills authority for?

A penalty under section 271D or 271E cannot be imposed if there was a reasonable cause for the failure, especially when cash transactions are genuine and reflected in the books of account. Furthermore, an industrial undertaking does not need to be registered under the Factories Act, 1948 to qualify for deductions under sections 80J and 80HH.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills · 275 ITR 79 · penalty section 271D · penalty section 271E · reasonable cause · genuine cash transaction · section 80J · section 80HH · Factories Act 1948 registration

Judgments citing CIT v. Hanuman Rice Mills

DCIT Central Circle-2, Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Hotel Sukhamaya Pvt. Ltd, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 206/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

…ween two parties are genuine the penalty u/s 271D is deleted. Various cases cited in the said judgment are: CIT vs. Maherwari Nirman Udyog (2008) 302 ITR 201 (Rajastan) CIT vs. Bhagwati Prasad Bajoria (HUF) (2003) 26 ITR 0487 CIT vs Saini Medical Store (2005) 275 ITR 79 b. No penalty u/s 2710/E should be impossible on the assessee for any failure referred in provision which include section 2710, if it is proved that there is a reasonable cause for failure of Reasonable causes was sufficiently made out and when transaction was never doubted by the Revenue Authority breach was to be treated as mere technical trans…

DCIT Central Circle-2, Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Hotel Sukhamaya Pvt. Ltd, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 205/CTK/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

Saf Yeast Co. P.Ltd., Mumba vs. ACIT CC-7(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, ground No. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1800/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S Saf Yeast Co. Pvt. Ltd., Tax Cc-7(1), Vs. 419, Swastik Chambers, Room No. 653, Aayakar Bhavan, Chembur, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400071. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aadcs 9080 J Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Saf Yeast Co. Pvt. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Income 419, Swastik Chambers, Chembur, Vs. Tax Cc-7(1), Mumbai-400071. Room No. 653, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aadcs 9080 J Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Saf Yeast Co. Pvt. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Income 419, Swastik Chambers, Chembur, Vs. Tax Cc-7(1), Mumbai-400071. Room No. 653, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aadcs 9080 J Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Hemant Chimanlal Leuwa, DR

Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the M/s Saf Yeast Co. Pvt. Ltd. Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking shoul…

Dy CIT - CC- 7(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Saf Yeast Co.Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly, ground No. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1714/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

For Respondent: Mr. Hemant Chimanlal Leuwa, DR

Section 80I

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed

ITA 1875/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that "Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…

Mamata Patra, Bhubaneswar vs. JCIT, Range-5, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 136/CTK/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Apr 2018AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.Tigga, DR

Section 269SSection 271D

…circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in upholding the judgment of the CIT(A) in deleting the penalty imposed on the assessee under s. 271D though for the different reasons.” (Para 7) iii) CIT Vs. Saini Medical Store, (2005) 275 ITR 79 :- “Conclusion : CIT(A) having accepted that violation of the provisions of s. 269SS was under a bona fide belief of the assessee and the same was not with any intention to avoid or evade the tax while deleting penalty under s. 271D and the findings of CIT(A) having been confirmed in appeal by the Tribunal, no substantial question of law arises”.…

DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai vs. Saf Yeast Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1780/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…

DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai vs. Saf Yeast Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1778/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…

DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai vs. Saf Yeast Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1777/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1637/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1636/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1635/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1634/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…able to state what permission was necessary because in fact no such permission was required for undertakings generating steam power and cooling power. The assessee relied on a judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Hanuman Rice Mills (275 ITR 79), wherein it was held that “Following the decision in CIT v. Sultan and Sons Rice Mill [2005] 272 ITR 181 (All.), it was to be held in the instant case that the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim under sections 80J and 80HH. These provisions do not require that the industrial undertaking should be registered under the Fa…