What is CIT v. Kaushalya authority for?

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is not invalidated by the Assessing Officer's failure to strike off irrelevant portions in the show cause notice, provided the assessee understood the exact charge and suffered no prejudice, indicating an application of mind by the AO.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Kaushalya?

511 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kaushalya (216 ITR 660), spanning 2016 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 274, Section 271(1)(c), Section 139(1), Section 132, Section 143(1), Section 143(3).

CIT v. Kaushalya (216 ITR 660)

Ashtavinayak Construction, Navi Mumbai vs. JCIT Cir. 22(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 5367/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Ashtavinayaka Jcit Circle 22(3), Mumbai. Construction, Vs. Plot No. R-478, Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Rabale, Navi Mumbai- 400701. Pan No. Aadfa1724G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Bhadresh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Mr. S.K. Mishra, DR

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…er the penalty proceedings be initiated or not during the course of the assessment proceedings and the AO is not required to record his satisfaction in a particular manner or reduce it into writing”. 8.2 In the case of CIT vs. Smt. Kaushalya and Others (1995) 216 ITR 660 (Bom), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held: “9. We will first take up the show-cause notice dated March 29, 1972, pertaining to the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessment orders were already made and the reasons for issuing the notice under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) were recorded by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee…

Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2637/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2633/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 2634/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2635/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2636/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2637/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2638/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, Vs Dcit, 527B, 5Th Floor, Hbn Officer, D- Central Circle-29, Mall, Distt. Centre, Paschim New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110087 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqpb1265L Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2019 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 30.01.2017. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nataka in the case of ITA Nos. 2633 to 2638/Del/2017 3 Sukhminder Singh Brar Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in WTA No. 12/Del/2011 dated 16.11.2017 and Sundram Finance Ltd. 403 ITR 407 and CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 and adjudicate the matter as deemed fit as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 8. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16/09/2019). (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16/09/2019 *Subodh*…

Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2636/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2633/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 2634/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2635/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2636/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2637/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2638/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, Vs Dcit, 527B, 5Th Floor, Hbn Officer, D- Central Circle-29, Mall, Distt. Centre, Paschim New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110087 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqpb1265L Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2019 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 30.01.2017. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nataka in the case of ITA Nos. 2633 to 2638/Del/2017 3 Sukhminder Singh Brar Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in WTA No. 12/Del/2011 dated 16.11.2017 and Sundram Finance Ltd. 403 ITR 407 and CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 and adjudicate the matter as deemed fit as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 8. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16/09/2019). (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16/09/2019 *Subodh*…

Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2635/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2633/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 2634/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2635/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2636/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2637/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2638/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, Vs Dcit, 527B, 5Th Floor, Hbn Officer, D- Central Circle-29, Mall, Distt. Centre, Paschim New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110087 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqpb1265L Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2019 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 30.01.2017. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nataka in the case of ITA Nos. 2633 to 2638/Del/2017 3 Sukhminder Singh Brar Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in WTA No. 12/Del/2011 dated 16.11.2017 and Sundram Finance Ltd. 403 ITR 407 and CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 and adjudicate the matter as deemed fit as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 8. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16/09/2019). (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16/09/2019 *Subodh*…

Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2634/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2633/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 2634/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2635/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2636/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2637/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2638/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, Vs Dcit, 527B, 5Th Floor, Hbn Officer, D- Central Circle-29, Mall, Distt. Centre, Paschim New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110087 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqpb1265L Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2019 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 30.01.2017. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nataka in the case of ITA Nos. 2633 to 2638/Del/2017 3 Sukhminder Singh Brar Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in WTA No. 12/Del/2011 dated 16.11.2017 and Sundram Finance Ltd. 403 ITR 407 and CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 and adjudicate the matter as deemed fit as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 8. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16/09/2019). (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16/09/2019 *Subodh*…

Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2638/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2633/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 2634/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2635/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2636/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2637/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2638/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, Vs Dcit, 527B, 5Th Floor, Hbn Officer, D- Central Circle-29, Mall, Distt. Centre, Paschim New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110087 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqpb1265L Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2019 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 30.01.2017. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nataka in the case of ITA Nos. 2633 to 2638/Del/2017 3 Sukhminder Singh Brar Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in WTA No. 12/Del/2011 dated 16.11.2017 and Sundram Finance Ltd. 403 ITR 407 and CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 and adjudicate the matter as deemed fit as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 8. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16/09/2019). (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16/09/2019 *Subodh*…

Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2633/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2633/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 2634/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2635/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2636/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2637/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2638/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sukhminder Singh Brar, Vs Dcit, 527B, 5Th Floor, Hbn Officer, D- Central Circle-29, Mall, Distt. Centre, Paschim New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110087 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqpb1265L Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2019 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 30.01.2017. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nataka in the case of ITA Nos. 2633 to 2638/Del/2017 3 Sukhminder Singh Brar Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in WTA No. 12/Del/2011 dated 16.11.2017 and Sundram Finance Ltd. 403 ITR 407 and CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 and adjudicate the matter as deemed fit as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 8. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16/09/2019). (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16/09/2019 *Subodh*…

Ocl India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6541/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Ocl India Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle 19(1), 17Th Floor, Narain Manzil, 26, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. (Respondent) Pan- Aaaco1354J (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. R.M. Mehta, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 16.09.2019 Order Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar:

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eping in view, the judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in WTA No. 12/Del/2011 dated 16.11.2017 and Sundram Finance Ltd. 403 ITR 407 and CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 and adjudicate the matter as deemed fit as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 6541/Del/2016 3 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16/09/2019). (Bhavnesh Saini) Accountant Member Dated: *aks* Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent…

Harish Kumar HUF, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-34(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1469/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Dr. B.R.R. Kumara.Y. : 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Naveen ND Gupta, CA & Sh. AshuFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 288ASection 94(7)

…ound that on facts the said question does not arise for consideration as well as for the reasons set out by us in the preceding paragraphs. In the result, Tax Case Appeals are dismissed. No costs. 3. CIT Vs Smt. Kaushalya [1994] 75 Taxman 549 (Bombay)/[1995] 216 ITR 660 (Bombay) In the above case, lAC had issued show-cause notice dated 28-3-1972 under section 274(2). Assessee had no knowledge 9 of exact Charge against him. Not only word 'or' had been used between two groups of charges but there was use of word 'deliberately' also. lAC imposed penalty of Rs. 13,000 for assessment year 1967-68 and ITO imposed pen…

M/S.Nishigandha Trading Co.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7244/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Porwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Abi Rama Karthikeyan, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 41(1)

…CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that non striking of the relevant part in the notice would not vitiate entire penalty proceedings by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Kaushalya & ors. (1995) 216 ITR 660. 3 M/s. Nishigandha Trading Co. Ltd. 6. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record including the impugned order, we observe that the AO has initiated the penalty proceedings in respect of addition made qua the cessation of liability of Rs.8,53,712/- by issuing notice dated 10.03.2105 under section 274 read with section 27…

Bloomfield Properties & Holdings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 7417/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri U.N. Marwah, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.D.R

Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.7417/DEL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bloomfield Properties & v. Assistant Commissioner of Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-5(1), 3, Shivji Marg, Westend New Delhi. Greens, Rang Puri, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACB3246N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri U.N. Marwah, CA Respondent by: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 15 04 2019 Date of pronouncement: 30 07 2019 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dat…

Ekta Shakti Developers, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 25(3) New DCIT, Central Circle (6)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 1762/MUM/2019[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1762/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2002-03) बिधम/ M/S. Ekta Shakti Developers Dcit, Central Circle (6) (2) 19Th Floor, Air India 401, Hallmark Business Vs. Plaza, Near Gurunank Building, Mumbai-400021. Hospital, Kala Nagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafe9373L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Jain & Mahaveer Jain (Ar) Revenue By: Mrs. Neelima V. Nadkarni (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/07/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 26.06.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-45, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2002-.03 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Order To Be Confirmed.

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain & MahaveerFor Respondent: Mrs. Neelima V. Nadkarni (DR)

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 275

…e decision of the Tribunal holding levy of penalty in such circumstances being bad, has been approved. 11. Apart from the aforesaid, the ld. CIT-DR made an argument based on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Smt. Kaushalya & Others, 216 ITR 660 (Bom.) to canvass support for his plea that non-striking off of the irrelevant portion of notice would not invalidate the imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. We have carefully considered the said ITA. No1762/M/2019 A.Y. 2002-03 argument set-up by the ld. CIT-DR and find that a similar issue had come up before our coordinate Bench in…