What is CIT v. Hissaria Bros. authority for?

Penalty proceedings for defaults under Sections 269SS and 269T are independent of assessment proceedings; therefore, the limitation period under Section 275(1)(c) for imposing such penalties is not contingent on the completion of appellate quantum proceedings.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Hissaria Bros.?

132 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Hissaria Bros. (291 ITR 244), spanning 2014 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Hissaria Bros. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 271D, Section 269SS, Section 269T, Section 271E, Section 275(1)(c), Section 153A.

CIT v. Hissaria Bros. (291 ITR 244)

Romaa Housing Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment

ITA 1346/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1345 To 1346 & 1347/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 V. M/S.Romaa Housing Pvt. Ltd., The Addl.Cit, No.1/107 & 108, Agr Tower, Central Range-3, P.H.Road Nerkundram, Chennai. Chennai-600 107. [Pan: Aaecr 6992 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Lekha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. T.M. Suganthamala

Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 274Section 275(1)(c)

…etion of the appellate quantum proceedings. This position has been made explicit in the decision in CIT v. Worldwide Township Projects Limited (supra) in which the Court concurred with the view expressed in Commissioner of Income- Tax v. Hissaria Bros. (2007) 291 ITR 244(Raj) in the following terms: "The expression other relevant thing used in s. 275(1)(a) and cl. (b) of Sub-s. (1) of S. 275 is significantly missing from cl. (c) of s. 275(1) to make out this distinction very clear. We are, therefore, of the opinion that since penalty proceedings for default in not having transactions through the bank as required…

Romaa Housing Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment

ITA 1345/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1345 To 1346 & 1347/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 V. M/S.Romaa Housing Pvt. Ltd., The Addl.Cit, No.1/107 & 108, Agr Tower, Central Range-3, P.H.Road Nerkundram, Chennai. Chennai-600 107. [Pan: Aaecr 6992 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Lekha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. T.M. Suganthamala

Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 274Section 275(1)(c)

…etion of the appellate quantum proceedings. This position has been made explicit in the decision in CIT v. Worldwide Township Projects Limited (supra) in which the Court concurred with the view expressed in Commissioner of Income- Tax v. Hissaria Bros. (2007) 291 ITR 244(Raj) in the following terms: "The expression other relevant thing used in s. 275(1)(a) and cl. (b) of Sub-s. (1) of S. 275 is significantly missing from cl. (c) of s. 275(1) to make out this distinction very clear. We are, therefore, of the opinion that since penalty proceedings for default in not having transactions through the bank as required…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 618/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 617/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 616/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 615/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 614/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 613/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 612/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 611/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. CIT, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. PAN: ABXPA4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:…

ITO, Ward- 76(1), New Delhi vs. Turner General Entertainment Networks India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6597/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. M. Balaganeshito Vs. Turner General Ward – 76(1) Entertainment Networks New Delhi India Pvt. Ltd., 5Th Floor, Radisson Commercial Plaza, National Highway-8, Mahipalpur – 26, Pan No. Aaccn 3434 E New Delhi- 110 037 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Manuj Sabharwal, Adv. Ms. Shalini, Adv. Shri Sudip Loth, Adv. Revenue By Shri Daya Inder Singh Sidhu, Cit- D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2024 Order Per M. Balaganesh: 1. This Appeal In Ita No.6597/Del/2017 For A.Y. 2011-12 Arises Out Of The Order By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 41, New Delhi In Appeal No. 289/16-17 Dated 16.08.2017 (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld Cit(A) In Short) Against The Penalty Order U/S 271C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred 2

Section 143(3)Section 271CSection 275(1)(c)

…eedings did not hinge on the completion of the appellate quantum proceedings. This position has been made explicit in the decision in Worldwide Township Projects Ltd. (supra) in which the Court concurred with the view expressed in CIT v. Hissaria Bros. [2007] 291 ITR 244/[2008] 169 Taxman 262 (Raj.) in the following terms: "The expression other relevant thing used in s. 275(1)(a) and cl. (b) of Sub-s. (1) of S. 275 is significantly missing from cl. (c) of s. 275(1) to make out this distinction very clear. We are, therefore, of the opinion that since penalty proceedings for default in not having transactions throu…

Sree Rajendra Suri Gurumandir Trust, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Office, Exemptions, Ward-3, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 754/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lumkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nischal B., D.R

Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 250Section 272A(2)(e)Section 274Section 275(1)Section 275(1)(c)

…as been Sree Rajendra Suri Gurumandir Trust, Bangalore Page 6 of 7 made explicit in the decision in CIT v. Worldwide Township Projects Limited (supra) in which the Court concurred with the view expressed in Commissioner of Income- Tax v. Hissaria Bros. (2007) 291 ITR 244(Raj) in the following terms: "The expression other relevant thing used m s. 275(l)(a) and cl. (b) of Sub- s. (1) of S. 275 is significantly missing from cl. (c) of s. 275(1) to make out this distinction very clear. We are, therefore, of the opinion that since penalty proceedings for default in not having transactions through the bank as required…

M/S.Karannur Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. The ITO, WD-1(2), Kozhikkode

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 249/COCH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri P. Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjith K. Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 271DSection 273BSection 274Section 275(1)(c)Section 80P(1)

…Act by the Jt. CIT, i.e., on 02.01.2018 (in the instant case), so that the limitation shall expire on 31.7.2018, cannot be regarded as good law in view of the decision in CIT vs. Hissaria Bros.[2016] 386 ITR 719 (SC), upholding the decision reported at [2007] 291 ITR 244 (Raj), para 9 whereof, reading as under, was referred to: “9. The Tribunal found on the question of limitation that the order of penalty should have been passed within 6 months from the end of the month in which the assessment was completed. On this premise, it was held that since all the penalty orders were passed beyond 6 months from the end of…

The Karannur Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. The ITO, WD-1(2), Kozhikkode

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 248/COCH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri P. Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjith K. Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 271DSection 273BSection 274Section 275(1)(c)Section 80P(1)

…Act by the Jt. CIT, i.e., on 02.01.2018 (in the instant case), so that the limitation shall expire on 31.7.2018, cannot be regarded as good law in view of the decision in CIT vs. Hissaria Bros.[2016] 386 ITR 719 (SC), upholding the decision reported at [2007] 291 ITR 244 (Raj), para 9 whereof, reading as under, was referred to: “9. The Tribunal found on the question of limitation that the order of penalty should have been passed within 6 months from the end of the month in which the assessment was completed. On this premise, it was held that since all the penalty orders were passed beyond 6 months from the end of…

DCIT-15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Translands Infrastructure Developers P Ltd, Vashi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1913/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Translands Income-Tax, 15(3)(1), Infrastructure Developers Mumbai P. Ltd. Jn-3-14-5, Asshirwad Chs, Sector-09, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadct 0036 B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Rupa NandaFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule, Sr. AR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 269SSection 271DSection 273BSection 3Section 68

…1 DCIT vs. M/s Translands Infrastructure Developers P Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s Translands Income-tax, 15(3)(1), Infrastructure Developers Mumbai P. Ltd. JN-3-14-5, Asshirwad CHS, Sector-09, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AADCT 0036 B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Ms. Rupa Nanda Respondent by : Shri P. D. Chougule, Sr. AR Date of Hearing 06.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 05.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (A…

Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 3, Ichalkaranji vs. Shri. Danwade Kutubuddin Shahabudin, Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1688/PUN/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Jasnani

Section 131(1)Section 132Section 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271ESection 275Section 275(1)(c)

…s own case u/s. 271E of the Act and drew our attention to para 6 of that order at page No. 73 of the paper book, argued that this Tribunal by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT Vs. Hissaria Bros. reported in 291 ITR 244 (Raj.), held, that there is inordinate delay in initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271E of the Act on 11-03-2010 as against the assessment order dated 30-11-2007. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue’s appeal by holding that the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271E of the Act is beyond the limitation. 4 ITA No. 1688/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2005-…

Jagdish Chandra Suwalka, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Range-7, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 376/JPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 44A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 376/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2015-16. cuke Jagdish Chandra Suwalka, The JCIT. Vs. 537-538, Mahima Trinity Mall, Range-7, Sewage Farm, New Sanganer Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. BYYPS 8809 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms Monisha Chou…

Ram Singh, Karnal vs. Addi. CIT Range, Karnal

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1457/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 273BSection 4

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Ram Singh, Vs. Addl. CIT, H. No. 1550, Sector-7, Range Karnal Urban Estate, Karnal, Haryana PAN :AZQPS7536M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Sh. Somil Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by Ms. Indu Sen, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.06.2022 Date of pronouncement 11.08.2022 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order dated 13.03.2020 passed by learned Commissio…

Raman Chaudhary, Karnal vs. Addi. CIT Spl. Range, Karnal

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1456/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Raman Chaudhary, Vs. ACIT, H. No. 1550, Sector-7, Special Range, Urban Estate, Karnal, Karnal Haryana PAN :AFOPC1631G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Sh. Somil Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by Ms. Indu Sen, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.06.2022 Date of pronouncement 11.08.2022 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order dated 13.03.2020 passed by learned…

Shri Jaydeepsinh Vajesinh Dodiya, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt. C.I.T., Range-7(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, Ground number 2 of the assessee’s appeal is party allowed

ITA 2429/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. ParmarFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R

Section 269Section 269SSection 271Section 271DSection 275(1)(a)Section 275(1)(c)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice President And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2012-13 Jaydeepsinh Vajesinh Jt. Comm. of Income Dodiya, At. Post Rampura Tax, Chekhla, Tal. Sanand. Vs Range-7(1), Dist. Ahmedabad-382210 Ahmedabad PAN: AFBPD2368C Himatnagar (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar Revenue by: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 13-04-2022 Date of pronouncement : 31-05-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the assessee again…

CIT v. Hissaria Bros.

What is CIT v. Hissaria Bros. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Hissaria Bros.

Romaa Housing Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

Romaa Housing Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

ITO, Ward- 76(1), New Delhi vs. Turner General Entertainment Networks India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Sree Rajendra Suri Gurumandir Trust, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Office, Exemptions, Ward-3, Bangalore

M/S.Karannur Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. The ITO, WD-1(2), Kozhikkode

The Karannur Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. The ITO, WD-1(2), Kozhikkode

DCIT-15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Translands Infrastructure Developers P Ltd, Vashi

Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 3, Ichalkaranji vs. Shri. Danwade Kutubuddin Shahabudin, Kolhapur

Jagdish Chandra Suwalka, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Range-7, Jaipur

Ram Singh, Karnal vs. Addi. CIT Range, Karnal

Raman Chaudhary, Karnal vs. Addi. CIT Spl. Range, Karnal

Shri Jaydeepsinh Vajesinh Dodiya, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt. C.I.T., Range-7(1), Ahmedabad