CIT v. J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar (Mad)

271 ITR 286High Court2004#9618 most cited

What is CIT v. J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar (Mad) authority for?

A revised return filed after the Department has discovered discrepancies is not considered voluntary. The assessee is bound to explain the additional income or omissions in the original return.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar · revised return · voluntary disclosure · admission of Managing Director · unexplained share applications · Explanation 1 to s. 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing CIT v. J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar (Mad)

Vinod Ratan Patil, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 3, Kalyan

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4246/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 68

…the same is a civil liability and cannot be equated with the criminal liability, as has been provided in Section 276 of the Act. In this regard, I would like to place reliance on the decisions delivered by the courts, in following cases: i) Ravi & Co Vs ACIT, 271 ITR 286 (Mad) ii) Bhairavlal Verma Vs Union of India, 230 ITR 855 (All) iii) CIT Vs Rakesh Suri, 331 ITR 458 (All) 6.4 In the case of In Union of India vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors (2008-TIOL- 192-SC-CX-LB), the Supreme Court examined Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and other provisions for imposition of penalty in different statutory enactments. It wa…

Shri Ghanshyam Dungarbhai Sutariya, Surat vs. The ACIT, Circle-8, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 2971/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ghanshyam Dungarbhai Sutaria, Vs. Acit, Circle-8, H.No. 1, 1St Floor, Sahaj Park Row Surat House, Hira Baug Circle, Vallabhacharya Road, Near Kailashdham Society, Ashwanikumar Road, Surat-395008 (Pan: Akkpp9318E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…rks Vs CIT (P&H) ~ > Badri Prasad Om Prakash Vs CIT (Raj) 163 ITR 440 > S.R. Arulprakasam Vs Prema Malini Vasan, ITO (Mad) 163 ITR 487 > F.C. Agarwal Vs CIT (Gauhati) 102 ITR 408 > CIT Vs J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar (Mad) 110 ITR 602 > Ravi & Co. Vs ACIT (Mad) 271 ITR 286 5.3 It is an obligatory duty cast upon income derived from any source under various heads and indicate the income under each head, which is chargeable to income-tax, after making the permissible deductions. Disclosure of income would be disclosure of particulars of income, which a person is duty bound to disclose in fulfillment of his statutory…

Sanjeev Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6886/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…e department. " CIT Vs. Sreenivasa Rai (Kerala) 242 ITR 29 ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 6 " LMP Precision Engg. Vs. DCIT (Guj) 330 ITR " CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri (All.) 331 ITR 458 " Biiand Ram Hargan Das (All) 171 ITR 390 " Ravi and Co. Vs. ACIT (Mad.) 271 ITR 286 " Dayabhai Giridharbhai Vs, CIT (Bom) 32 ITR 677 " Mahavir Metal Work Vs. CIT (PAH) 92 ITR 513 5.9 In the latest judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs CIT (2017)(SC) 246 taxmann 373 (SC) it was held by the Apex court that additional income detected by the department and declared by the appellant, consequent to se…

Sanjeev Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6885/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…e department. " CIT Vs. Sreenivasa Rai (Kerala) 242 ITR 29 ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 6 " LMP Precision Engg. Vs. DCIT (Guj) 330 ITR " CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri (All.) 331 ITR 458 " Biiand Ram Hargan Das (All) 171 ITR 390 " Ravi and Co. Vs. ACIT (Mad.) 271 ITR 286 " Dayabhai Giridharbhai Vs, CIT (Bom) 32 ITR 677 " Mahavir Metal Work Vs. CIT (PAH) 92 ITR 513 5.9 In the latest judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs CIT (2017)(SC) 246 taxmann 373 (SC) it was held by the Apex court that additional income detected by the department and declared by the appellant, consequent to se…

Sanjeev Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6884/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…e department. " CIT Vs. Sreenivasa Rai (Kerala) 242 ITR 29 ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 6 " LMP Precision Engg. Vs. DCIT (Guj) 330 ITR " CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri (All.) 331 ITR 458 " Biiand Ram Hargan Das (All) 171 ITR 390 " Ravi and Co. Vs. ACIT (Mad.) 271 ITR 286 " Dayabhai Giridharbhai Vs, CIT (Bom) 32 ITR 677 " Mahavir Metal Work Vs. CIT (PAH) 92 ITR 513 5.9 In the latest judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs CIT (2017)(SC) 246 taxmann 373 (SC) it was held by the Apex court that additional income detected by the department and declared by the appellant, consequent to se…

Sanjeev J Ain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6883/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…e department. " CIT Vs. Sreenivasa Rai (Kerala) 242 ITR 29 ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 6 " LMP Precision Engg. Vs. DCIT (Guj) 330 ITR " CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri (All.) 331 ITR 458 " Biiand Ram Hargan Das (All) 171 ITR 390 " Ravi and Co. Vs. ACIT (Mad.) 271 ITR 286 " Dayabhai Giridharbhai Vs, CIT (Bom) 32 ITR 677 " Mahavir Metal Work Vs. CIT (PAH) 92 ITR 513 5.9 In the latest judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs CIT (2017)(SC) 246 taxmann 373 (SC) it was held by the Apex court that additional income detected by the department and declared by the appellant, consequent to se…

Sanjeev J Ain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6882/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…e department. " CIT Vs. Sreenivasa Rai (Kerala) 242 ITR 29 ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 6 " LMP Precision Engg. Vs. DCIT (Guj) 330 ITR " CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri (All.) 331 ITR 458 " Biiand Ram Hargan Das (All) 171 ITR 390 " Ravi and Co. Vs. ACIT (Mad.) 271 ITR 286 " Dayabhai Giridharbhai Vs, CIT (Bom) 32 ITR 677 " Mahavir Metal Work Vs. CIT (PAH) 92 ITR 513 5.9 In the latest judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs CIT (2017)(SC) 246 taxmann 373 (SC) it was held by the Apex court that additional income detected by the department and declared by the appellant, consequent to se…

Rishabh Buildwell P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6881/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…e department. " CIT Vs. Sreenivasa Rai (Kerala) 242 ITR 29 ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 6 " LMP Precision Engg. Vs. DCIT (Guj) 330 ITR " CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri (All.) 331 ITR 458 " Biiand Ram Hargan Das (All) 171 ITR 390 " Ravi and Co. Vs. ACIT (Mad.) 271 ITR 286 " Dayabhai Giridharbhai Vs, CIT (Bom) 32 ITR 677 " Mahavir Metal Work Vs. CIT (PAH) 92 ITR 513 5.9 In the latest judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs CIT (2017)(SC) 246 taxmann 373 (SC) it was held by the Apex court that additional income detected by the department and declared by the appellant, consequent to se…

Rishabh Buildwell P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6880/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…e department. " CIT Vs. Sreenivasa Rai (Kerala) 242 ITR 29 ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 6 " LMP Precision Engg. Vs. DCIT (Guj) 330 ITR " CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri (All.) 331 ITR 458 " Biiand Ram Hargan Das (All) 171 ITR 390 " Ravi and Co. Vs. ACIT (Mad.) 271 ITR 286 " Dayabhai Giridharbhai Vs, CIT (Bom) 32 ITR 677 " Mahavir Metal Work Vs. CIT (PAH) 92 ITR 513 5.9 In the latest judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs CIT (2017)(SC) 246 taxmann 373 (SC) it was held by the Apex court that additional income detected by the department and declared by the appellant, consequent to se…

Nse It Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5935/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5935/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06) बिाम/ M/S. Nse. It Ltd, Dcit 8(2), Mumbai Trade Globe, Ground Floor, Andheri Kurla Road, V. Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcn0159P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Sunil NahtaFor Respondent: Shri. T.A Khan(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…sh during the search except to assert that he has disclosed the said income only to buy peace with the Department, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held that Tribunal erred in setting aside the penalty under section 271(1)(c). In Ravi & Co. vs. Asstt. CIT (2004) 271 ITR 286 (Mad) it was held that the though the assessee has filed a revised return, unless the assessee can show that the same was filed voluntarily, penalty was imposable for concealment of income. In CIT vs. Dr. A. Mohd. Abdul Khadir (2003) 183 CTR (Mad) 543 : (2003) 260 ITR 650 (Mad) penalty under s. 271 (1) (c) was held justified in spite of filing of…

R.Vasuki, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 899/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Mrs. Veni Raj, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 03.08.2017
Section 131Section 133ASection 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…eturn cannot be regarded as voluntary, which only follows a discovery and, in fact, an admission by the Managing Director of the company as to the share applications being unexplained. The law in the matter is well-settled, viz. Ravi & Co. v. Asst. CIT [2004] 271 ITR 286 (Mad); S.R.Arulprakasam v. ITO [1987] 163 ITR 487 (Mad); CIT v. J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar [1977] 110 ITR 602 (Mad); Ayyasami Nadar & Bros. v. CIT [1956] 30 ITR 565 (Mad), to cite some. The assessee was, accordingly, bound to explain the additional income per her ‘revised return’ or, per contra, the omission of the said disclosure per her origina…