CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City

64 Taxmann.com 75Supreme Court of India2015#2376 most cited

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

For initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271D or 271E, the Assessing Officer must record satisfaction in the assessment order; non-recording of such satisfaction is fatal to the penalty.

49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City · Jai Laxmi Rice Mills · penalty under section 271D · penalty under section 271E · recording satisfaction for penalty · satisfaction in assessment order · initiation of penalty proceedings · mandatory satisfaction penalty · non-recording of satisfaction fatal · sections 271D and 271E pari materia

Sections most often in play

Section 271DSection 271ESection 269SSSection 143(3)Section 269TSection 271(1)(c)Section 275(1)(c)Section 147

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271epenalty under section 271dsection 271esatisfaction for initiation of penaltysection 269tsection 275(1)(c)section 269ssection 275(1)section 275construction pesection 275(1)(a)section 271d

Judgments citing CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City

ATMA RAM BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 3593/DEL/2025[A.Y. 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 269TSection 270ASection 271ESection 69ASection 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3593/Del/2025, A.Y. 2020-21 ATMA RAM BUILDERS Income Tax Officer, PRIVATE LIMITED, Central Circle-5, NEW DELHI Vs. New Delhi 8, ATMA RAM MANSION (SCINDIA HOUSE), K.G. MARG, CONAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI PAN: AAACA0519M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Ranjan Chopra, ms. Ank Respondent by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 10/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 16/01/2026 O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.): 1. This appeal is directed against t…

MR. B. ANAND BABU,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3,, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the penalty appeals are allowed

ITA 2087/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2085, 2086 & 2087/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20 v. Mr.B. Anand Babu, The DCIT, 225A, Sambal Thottam, Central Circle-3, Samichettipalayam, Coimbatore. Coimbatore-641 047. [PAN: AHNPB 9506 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.A.G. Sathyanarayana, Advocate & Mr. Shrenik Ch…

B. ANAND BABU,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3,, COIMBATORE

ITA 2086/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Mr.A.G. SathyanarayanaFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH: CHENNΑΙ श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2085, 2086 & 2087/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20 Mr.B. Anand Babu, v. The DCIT, 225A, Sambal Thottam, Central Circle-3, Samichettipalayam, Coimbatore. Coimbatore-641 047. [PAN: AHNPB 9506 A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.A.G. Sathyanarayana,…

B. ANAND BABU,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the penalty appeals are allowed

ITA 2085/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2085, 2086 & 2087/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20 v. Mr.B. Anand Babu, The DCIT, 225A, Sambal Thottam, Central Circle-3, Samichettipalayam, Coimbatore. Coimbatore-641 047. [PAN: AHNPB 9506 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.A.G. Sathyanarayana, Advocate & Mr. Shrenik Ch…

ANAND MAHENDRA KAPADIA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(1), SURAT

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 710/SRT/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 269SSection 271D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT (HYBRID HEARING) Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Accountant Member ITA No: 709 & 710/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Anand Mahendra Kapadia Income Tax Officer Titaanium Business Hub, Ward-3(2)(1), 2nd Floor, Sarsana, Vs Surat Near VIP Crossing, Surat Khajod Road, Bhimrad, Surat-395007 PAN: ADYPK6654R (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Revenue Represented: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 13-11-2025 Date of pronouncement : 25-11-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTH…

ANAND MAHENDRA KAPADIA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(1), SURAT

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 709/SRT/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 269SSection 271D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT (HYBRID HEARING) Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Accountant Member ITA No: 709 & 710/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Anand Mahendra Kapadia Income Tax Officer Titaanium Business Hub, Ward-3(2)(1), 2nd Floor, Sarsana, Vs Surat Near VIP Crossing, Surat Khajod Road, Bhimrad, Surat-395007 PAN: ADYPK6654R (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Revenue Represented: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 13-11-2025 Date of pronouncement : 25-11-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTH…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

ITA 1899/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1899/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Cross-Objection No.65/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2021-22 v. Jayapriya Company, No.37, Second Floor, Siva Vishnu Complex, Natesan Street, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. [PAN: AAHFJ 0958 M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross- Objector) Mr. Bipin C.N., CIT & Ms. R. Anita, Addl…

MODERN ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION,BALASORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, BHUABENSWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 378/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 153ASection 271Section 271DSection 271E

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.377/CTK/2025 आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.378/CTK/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Modern Engineering & Vs JCIT, Central Circle, Balasore Management Foundation, Banaparia, Kuruda, Balasore PAN No. : AACTM 1058 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri K.C.Jen…

MODERN ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION,BALASORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, BHUABENSWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 377/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 153ASection 271Section 271DSection 271E

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.377/CTK/2025 आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.378/CTK/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Modern Engineering & Vs JCIT, Central Circle, Balasore Management Foundation, Banaparia, Kuruda, Balasore PAN No. : AACTM 1058 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri K.C.Jen…

PROMILA SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT RANGE 2(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5841/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 5841/Del/2024 (A.Y 2015-16) Promila Singhal, Vs Acit C/O.D-22, Second Floor, South Range (1)1 Extension, 1, Room No. 210, Income New Delhi Tax Office, Cgo Complex, Pan: Acqps3116D 1, Purani Hapur/Chungi, Ghaziabad Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Ashwani Taneja, Adv, Sh. Divyansh Dubey, Adv, Sh. Shivam Kukreja, Adv & Sh. Shantanu Jain, Adv Revenue By Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ESection 275(1)

…1 Promila Singhal Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [ DELHI BENCH : “A” NEW DELHI] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5841/DEL/2024 (A.Y 2015-16) Promila Singhal, Vs ACIT C/o.D-22, Second floor, South Range (1)1 Extension, 1, Room No. 210, Income New Delhi Tax Office, CGO Complex, PAN: ACQPS3116D 1, Purani Hapur/Chungi, Ghaziabad Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Ashwani Taneja, Adv, Sh. Divyansh Dubey, Adv, Sh. Shivam Kukreja, adv and Sh. Shantanu Jain, Adv Revenue by Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date of Hearing 17/07/2…

MALECKUNNEL PHILIP VARGHESE,SAMBALPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 258/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.256/Ctk/2025 & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.258/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Maleckunnel Philip Varghese Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur At/Po/Ps: Ainthapali, Dist : Sambalpur-768004 Pan No. :Abvpv 8418 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Sh P.K.Mishra, Himanshu Jena & Narahari Swain, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Sh P.K.Mishra, Himanshu Jena &For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271(1)(c)Section 271DSection 271E

…sआयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.256/CTK/2025 AND आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.258/CTK/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Maleckunnel Philip Varghese Vs DCIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur AT/PO/PS: Ainthapali, Dist : Sambalpur-768004 PAN No. :ABVPV 8418 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Sh P.K…

MALECKUNNEL PHILIP VARGHESE,SAMBALPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 256/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.256/Ctk/2025 & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.258/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Maleckunnel Philip Varghese Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur At/Po/Ps: Ainthapali, Dist : Sambalpur-768004 Pan No. :Abvpv 8418 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Sh P.K.Mishra, Himanshu Jena & Narahari Swain, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Sh P.K.Mishra, Himanshu Jena &For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271(1)(c)Section 271DSection 271E

…sआयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.256/CTK/2025 AND आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.258/CTK/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Maleckunnel Philip Varghese Vs DCIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur AT/PO/PS: Ainthapali, Dist : Sambalpur-768004 PAN No. :ABVPV 8418 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Sh P.K…

AZAD COACH BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMTIED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1978/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 269SSection 271Section 271D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHODHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Years: 2012-13 Azad Coach Builders Pvt. Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 27th KM, Mysore Road, Ward - 1(1)(2), Bangalore. Sheshagirihalli, Bangalore – 562 109. . PAN – AABCA 4311 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ravishankar S.V, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 05.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 05.08.2025 O R D E R PER SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHODHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by the ass…

ANIL SHARMA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

8. In view of the above findings, this appeal is hereby allowed and the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A), NFAC upholding the penalty order u/s 271E of the Act, is hereby set aside

ITA 1480/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal, Feeling Aggrieved By Order Dated 15.10.2024, Passed By Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi. The Matter Pertains To The Assessment Year 2014-15. Vide Impugned Order, Penalty Imposed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271E Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) Has Been Upheld.

For Appellant: Sh. Naman Maloo, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234ASection 234DSection 244ASection 269Section 269TSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1480/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sh. Anil Sharma Cuke The ITO, Vs. 23, Tripolia Bazar, Ward-1(3), Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BJQPS9717Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Sh. Naman Maloo, C.A. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Sh. Gautam Singh Choud…

SHRI PRAKASH JIWANDAS WANJARI,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, we are of the considered view that the case on hand does not warrant levy of penalty under Section 271D of the Act

ITA 232/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 273ASection 80C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.232/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2011–12) Prakash Jiwandas Wanjari Plot no.G–102, Dhanashree Apartment ……………. Appellant Tikekar Marg, Dhantoli, Nagpur 440 012 PAN – AAEPW5981A v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–5, Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Mahavir Atal Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 08/10/2024 Date of Order – 25/10/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impu…

BHAGAWAN SRI BALASAIBABA CENTRAL TRUST,KURNOOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, TIRUPATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 618/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2016-17 Bhagawan Sri Balasaibaba Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Central Trust, Sri Nilayam Fort, Tirupati. Andhra Pradesh. Kurnool. Pan : Aaatb3818R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Pawan kumar Chakrapani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhagawan Sri Balasaibaba Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Central Trust, Sri Nilayam Fort, Tirupati. Andhra Pradesh. Kurnool. PAN : AAATB3818R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Pawan kumar Chakrapani, CA Revenue by: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 15.10.2024 Date of pronouncement: 16.10.2024 O R D E R PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M. This appeal is filed by the ass…

KANHIAYA LAL SAIN,JAIPUR vs. JCIT RANGE-7 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the Appeals of the appellant stands allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 1022/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 271Section 271DSection 271E

…uld be recorded by the assessing officer in the assessment order as to imposition of penalty. Non-recording of satisfaction is fatal. In this connection, reference was made to a decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Jaya Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City, (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 75 (SC). It was further pointed out that in the aforesaid decision delivered by the Supreme Court in the context of initiation of penalty proceeding KANHIYA LAL SAIN VS JCIT, RANGE-7, JAIPUR under Section 271E of the Act, it was held that recording of satisfaction is mandatory for initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Ac…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 64/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ded by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order as to imposition of penalty. It was argued that non-recording of satisfaction is fatal. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jayalakshmi Rice Mills Ambalacity, reported in (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 75 (S.C), was relied upon. Accordingly, the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held that provisions of section 271D and 271E are pari materia to each other and the recording of satisfaction is a must. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: “13. We have considered the rival submissions made at the bar. 14. Issue raise…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 57/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ded by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order as to imposition of penalty. It was argued that non-recording of satisfaction is fatal. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jayalakshmi Rice Mills Ambalacity, reported in (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 75 (S.C), was relied upon. Accordingly, the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held that provisions of section 271D and 271E are pari materia to each other and the recording of satisfaction is a must. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: “13. We have considered the rival submissions made at the bar. 14. Issue raise…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 56/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ded by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order as to imposition of penalty. It was argued that non-recording of satisfaction is fatal. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jayalakshmi Rice Mills Ambalacity, reported in (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 75 (S.C), was relied upon. Accordingly, the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held that provisions of section 271D and 271E are pari materia to each other and the recording of satisfaction is a must. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: “13. We have considered the rival submissions made at the bar. 14. Issue raise…

Showing 1–20 of 49 · Page 1 of 3