CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills

379 ITR 521Supreme Court of India2015#975 most cited

What is CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills authority for?

The assessing officer must record explicit satisfaction in the assessment order for initiating penalty proceedings under sections like 271D, 271E, 269SS, 269T, or 269ST; a mere recommendation or information to another authority is insufficient to validate the penalty.

110

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills · penalty initiation satisfaction · recording satisfaction assessment order · Section 271D penalty · Section 271E penalty · Section 269SS penalty · Section 269ST penalty · Assessing Officer satisfaction · validity of penalty proceedings · penalty under section 269T

Sections most often in play

Section 271DSection 269SSSection 143(3)Section 271ESection 269TSection 271(1)(c)Section 273BSection 147

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271esatisfaction for initiation of penaltysection 275(1)(c)penalty under section 271dsection 275(1)(a)section 271esection 269tsection 275(1)section 143(l)(a)section 269stsection 269sssection 275

Judgments citing CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1165/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…O considered that income and opted to levy the penalty on the other sections of the Act. Be that it so may then in that circumstance on this issue Id. AR of the assessee serviced before us the decision of Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills 379 ITR 521 wherein the Apex court has also held that; 5. As pointed out above, insofar as, fresh assessment order is concerned, there was no satisfaction recorded regarding penalty proceeding under Section 271E of the Act, though in that order the Assessing Officer wanted penalty proceeding to be initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, insofar a…

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1164/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…O considered that income and opted to levy the penalty on the other sections of the Act. Be that it so may then in that circumstance on this issue Id. AR of the assessee serviced before us the decision of Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills 379 ITR 521 wherein the Apex court has also held that; 5. As pointed out above, insofar as, fresh assessment order is concerned, there was no satisfaction recorded regarding penalty proceeding under Section 271E of the Act, though in that order the Assessing Officer wanted penalty proceeding to be initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, insofar a…

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1162/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…O considered that income and opted to levy the penalty on the other sections of the Act. Be that it so may then in that circumstance on this issue Id. AR of the assessee serviced before us the decision of Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills 379 ITR 521 wherein the Apex court has also held that; 5. As pointed out above, insofar as, fresh assessment order is concerned, there was no satisfaction recorded regarding penalty proceeding under Section 271E of the Act, though in that order the Assessing Officer wanted penalty proceeding to be initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, insofar a…

Shivalik Vihar Sites Pvt. Ltd, Punjab vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal stand allowed

ITA 1195/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1195/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shivalik Vihar Sites Pvt. Ltd. Jcit Flat No. 101, Ff Sector-17, बनाम/ Vs. Shivalik Apartments, Kharar Chandigarh-160017 Mohali, Punjab-140603 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-5424-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Nitin Bhasin (Advocate) & Shri Ashutosh Vaid (Advocate)- Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Bhasin (Advocate) &For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…the Range Head regarding violation of provisions of Sec.269SS and 269T during the course of assessment proceedings itself. In support of its submissions, the Ld. AR referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (379 ITR 521) which specified that no penalty could be levied u/s 271E without recording the satisfaction. The assessee also referred to the decision of Chennai Tribunal in the case of Shri Subramanium Thanu (ITA Nos.785/Chny/2023 & ors. dated 13-03-2024) which deleted similar penalty u/s 271D by following various decisions including this decision as well as…

Muthusamy Nagaraj, Erode vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Erode Range Erode

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

ITA 2878/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Respondent: Ms.R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…impugned action of the Ld.Addl. CIT levying penalty for violation of Section 269SS of the Act and u/s.271D of the Act to the tune of ₹15 lakhs is bad in law as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills reported in [2015] 379 ITR 521 (SC) and also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in the case of Srinivasa Reddy Reddeppagari v. JCIT in WP No.44285 of 2022 and several other coordinate Bench decisions of this Tribunal which will be discussed infra. Muthusamy Nagaraj :: 3 :: 4. Since the assessee has assailed the penalty levied u/s.271D of the Act on l…

Siluvaikani Chelliah, Chengalpattu vs. ITO, Ncw-22(6), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2655/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Dr. CA. Abhishek MuraliFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274

…the assessment order, the subsequent levy of penalty u/s.271D of the Act by the FAO is unsustainable in law. 7. To fortify the above proposition, the Ld.AR placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills [2015] 379 ITR 521 (SC), as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Srinivasa Reddy Reddeppagari v. JCIT (W.P. No. 44285 of 2022). Further reliance was placed on various decisions rendered by coordinate benches of this Tribunal. 8. Per contra, the ld.DR for the revenue, strongly supported the orders of the authorities and prayed for confirmin…

Sai Samarpan Realtors Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. JCIT Central Range-1, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5866/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraita No.5866/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2020-21) Sai Samarpan Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Jcit, C/O C.S. Anand, Adv. Central Circle-1, B-81, First Floor (Part B), Vs. Delhi. Defence Colony, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, New Delhi-110024. Pan-Aakcs6743D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shric.S. Anand & Ms. Vaishnavi Yadav, Advs. Department By Shrimanish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2025

Section 153CSection 269SSection 271D

…ther simply informed the Addl. CIT, Central Range-1, Delhi to proceed against the assessee under section 271D of the Act. 7. In this regard the Ld. AR relied upon a judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jai Laxmi Rice Mills, reported in 379 ITR 521. Such information cannot be said to be satisfaction of the Ld. AO and relying upon the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court the penalty under Section 271D is also found to be void and therefore, liable to be quashed as prayed for by the Ld. AR. 8. However, once the Co-ordinate Bench has already held that the assessee was not beneficiary of…

Sai Samarpan Realtors Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. JCIT Central Range-1, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5865/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraita No.5866/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2020-21) Sai Samarpan Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Jcit, C/O C.S. Anand, Adv. Central Circle-1, B-81, First Floor (Part B), Vs. Delhi. Defence Colony, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, New Delhi-110024. Pan-Aakcs6743D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shric.S. Anand & Ms. Vaishnavi Yadav, Advs. Department By Shrimanish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2025

Section 153CSection 269SSection 271D

…ther simply informed the Addl. CIT, Central Range-1, Delhi to proceed against the assessee under section 271D of the Act. 7. In this regard the Ld. AR relied upon a judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jai Laxmi Rice Mills, reported in 379 ITR 521. Such information cannot be said to be satisfaction of the Ld. AO and relying upon the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court the penalty under Section 271D is also found to be void and therefore, liable to be quashed as prayed for by the Ld. AR. 8. However, once the Co-ordinate Bench has already held that the assessee was not beneficiary of…

Mahammad Aftab Kattilvalappil, Thalassery vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Kozhikode

ITA 543/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: None
Section 144Section 250Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…e Appellant had no malafide intent and acted under compulsion. 10. Penalty Proceedings Barred by Limitation The penalty order was passed without recording satisfaction in the assessment order, rendering it void-ab-initio, In CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (2015) 379 ITR 521 (SC), it was held that penalty under Section 271D cannot be levied in the absence of satisfaction recorded in the assessment order.” 3. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, none present on behalf of the Assessee. On perusal of record we find that the Assessee had filed paper-book containing submissions. We have heard learned Departmental Re…

Verambally Thazhikuniyil Vinodan, Kozhikode vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Kochi

ITA 350/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 274

…of Grihalaxmi Vision (supra). 10. Next, we shall deal with the submission of the assessee that in absence of finding by the AO, the penalty proceedings are bad in law in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills 379 ITR 521 (SC). The AO had not recorded his satisfaction in the assessment order for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271D. However, the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Grihalaxmi Vision (supra) vide para 10, held that "the statement in the assessment order that the proceedings u/s. 271D and section 271E are initiated is inconsequential" as…

M/S. the Thirunelly Service Co-Operative Bank, Wayanad vs. JCIT, Range-2, Kozhikode

ITA 421/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 80P

…n the absence of finding in the assessment order recording satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271D, no penalty can be levied placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of case of CIT Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (2015) 379 ITR 521 (SC). 9. On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR placing reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of The Nadapuram Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. JCIT in ITA No. 957/Coch/2024 dt.14/05/2025 submits that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is in accordance with law, therefore no interference by this Tribunal is required. 10. We have heard the rival submi…

M/S. the Thirunelly Co-Operative Bankltd., Wayanad vs. JCIT Range-2, Kozhikode

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 420/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 80P

…n the absence of finding in the assessment order recording satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271D, no penalty can be levied placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of case of CIT Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (2015) 379 ITR 521 (SC). 9. On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR placing reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of The Nadapuram Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. JCIT in ITA No. 957/Coch/2024 dt.14/05/2025 submits that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is in accordance with law, therefore no interference by this Tribunal is required. 10. We have heard the rival sub…

Kosanam Rama Rao, Guntur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Guntur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 226/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…nitiating the said penalty proceedings in the body of the assessment order by the A.O., is no more res-integra, pursuant 9 Kosanam Rama Rao, Guntur. to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City, (2015) 379 ITR 521 (SC). The A.O., in the case before the Hon’ble Apex Court, had framed the original assessment vide an ex-parte order dated 26.02.1996, determining the income of the assessee at Rs. 18.34 lacs (approx.). The A.O., while framing the assessment, had in the body of the assessment order taken cognizance of the fact that the assessee had contravened th…

Yadagiri Tattari, Hyderabad vs. JCIT., Range-15, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 474/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA A. SrinivasFor Respondent: Shri D. Praveen, Sr. AR
Section 269Section 269SSection 271Section 271D

…rder u/sec.271D of the Act without properly recording the reasons for assuming jurisdiction either by himself or by the Assessing Officer. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., Jai Laxmi Rice Mills [2015] 379 ITR 521 (SC). Learned Counsel for the Assessee further submitted that, the assumption of jurisdiction by the JCIT without there being any pending assessment proceedings is incorrect. In this regard, he relied upon decision of ITAT, Indore Bench in the case of Shri Umakant Sharma, Jhabua vs., JCIT, Ratlam in ITA.Nos.364 to 366/Ind./2022, order dated 19.07…

Natesan Shanmugam, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

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

ITA 3052/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3052/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Natesan Shanmugam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 24, Pumping Station Iv Street, Ward 1(1), Thirunagar Colony, Erode 638 003. Erode. [Pan:Apmps2367B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. M.D. Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 5 Grounds Of Appeal, Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Penalty Imposed Under Section 271D Of The 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode]For Respondent: Dr. M.D. Vijay Kumar, JCIT
Section 269SSection 271DSection 4Section 50C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस.एस. िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3052/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Natesan Shanmugam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 24, Pumping Station IV Street, Ward 1(1), Thirunagar Colony, Erode 638 003. Erode. [PAN:APMPS2367B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Dr.…

Rakesh Kumar Jain, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 362/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.361/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Madhu Devi V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) C.R. Building, 1St Floor Annex #27-23-66, Chetla Bazar M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Governorpet, Vijayawada – 520002 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aelpj0707L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.362/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rakesh Kumar Jain V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) C.R. Building, 1St Floor Annex D.No. 27-12-35, Chetla Bazar M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Governorpet, Vijayawada – 520002 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Astps2713B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (HYBRID HEARING) श्री धिजय पाल राि, उपाध्यक्ष, एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.361/VIZ/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Madhu Devi v. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) C.R. Building, 1st Floor Annex #27-23-66, Chetla Bazar M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Governorpet, Vijayawada – 520002 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [PAN: AELPJ0707L] (अपीलार्थ…

Narender Goud Tigulla, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 737/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Mohd.Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.Kumaran, DR
Section 153ASection 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.737/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Narender Goud Tigulla Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Vs. Ward-9(1) [PAN :ABSPT0432C] Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee by: Mohd.Afzal, AR राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue by: Shri R.Kumaran, DR सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 16/12/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement on: 10/01/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA…

Sri Sankaranarayanan Krishnamoorthy, Chennai vs. ITO-1(2) International Taxation, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. R. Viswanathan, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 269SSection 271D

…y assessee u/s.269SS of the Act, the Ld.AR asserted that impugned penalty levied by the Addl.CIT is bad in law and in support of such a contention cited the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills reported in [2015] 379 ITR 521 (SC) and also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in the case of Srinivasa Reddy Reddeppagari V. JCIT in WP No.44285 of 2022 and several other coordinate bench decision of this Tribunal which will be discussed infra. 7. In this regard, in similar case, we note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Jai Lax…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Non-Corporate Circle vs. Akmg Alloys Private Ltd., Dindigul

In the result, Cross-Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and

ITA 873/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri T. Srinivasa, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement –
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274

…by assessee u/s.269SS of the Act, the Ld.AR asserted that impugned penalty levied by the Addl.CIT is bad in law and in support of such a contention cited the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills reported in [2015] 379 ITR 521 (SC) and also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in the case of Srinivasa Reddy Reddeppagari V. JCIT in WP No.44285 of 2022 and several other coordinate bench decision of this Tribunal which will be discussed infra. 7. In this regard, in similar case, we note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Jai La…

M/S. Shri Shi vs. Hakthi Foundations Pvt. Ltd., Chennaivs.Addl.CIT, Central Range-3, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1749/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. R. Viswanathan, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. N. Balakrishnan, CIT
Section 153CSection 269SSection 27Section 271Section 271DSection 271E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1749/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 v. M/s. Shri Shivshakthi – The Addl. CIT, Foundations Pvt. Ltd., Central Range-3, 1870, Block-I, Chennai. Thiruvalluvar Colony, Annanagar West, Chennai-600 040. [PAN: AALCS 6282 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr. R. Viswanathan, FCA ""यथ" क"…