CIT v. Krishi Tyre Retreading Industries

360 ITR 581High Court#20613 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2021.

Judgments citing CIT v. Krishi Tyre Retreading Industries

M/S. J Kumar -Rps Joint Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai

In the result, impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5081/MUM/2019[201-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2021

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5081/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2011-12) M/S. J. Kumar –Rps Joint Venture, C-113, Shyam Kamal, Agarwal Market, Tejpal Road, Vile Parle (East), Mumbai 400 057 Pan: Aabtj1167E ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dcit Central Circle -5(1), Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad

Section 271(1)(c)

…made on the basis of estimation and not on account of any concrete evidence of concealment, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be invoked. The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading Industries, reported as 360 ITR 581(Raj), taking a similar view held that where estimated additions are made, no penalty is leviable under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal in catena of decisions has consistently held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act levied on addition resulting from estimations is unsustainable. 6. The CIT(A) in impugned order has rejected…

ITO Ward1(4), Thane West vs. Smt. Jay Naresh Purswani, Thane

In the result, appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5048/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5048/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं. 5049/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2011-12) Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Room No.11, 6Th Floor, B-Wing, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane (W) – 400 604 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Smt.Jaya Naresh Purswani, 1703, Light Bridge, Glady Alwares Road, Hiranandani Meadows, Thane (W) – 400 604 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad

Section 271(1)(c)

…made on the basis of estimation and not on account of any concrete evidence of concealment, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be invoked. The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading Industries, reported as 360 ITR 581(Raj), taking a similar view held that where estimated additions are made, no penalty is leviable under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal in various decisions has repeatedly held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act levied on addition resulting from estimations is unsustainable. Thus, in the light of the facts of the case and t…

ITO, Ward-1(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Vishvakarma Fabricators Prop. Ashwin A. Panchal, Mumbai

In the result, appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5047/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5046/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं. 5047/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2011-12) Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3),Thane, Room No.10, 6Th Floor, B-Wing, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane (W) – 400 064 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Vishvakarma Fabricators Prop.Ashwin A. Panchal, B/2/402 Swastik Residency, G.B.Road, Kasarvadavali, Kavesar, Thane 400 607 Pan: Afzpa6269D ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Usha Gaikwad सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 04/02/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 17/02/2021 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad

Section 271(1)(c)

…made on the basis of estimation and not on account of any concrete evidence of concealment, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be invoked. The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading Industries, reported as 360 ITR 581(Raj), taking a similar view held that where estimated additions are made, no penalty is leviable under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, in the light of the facts of the case and the decisions 4 ITA NO.5047/MUM/2019(A.Y.2011-12) referred above, we find no infirmity in the impugned orders of CIT(A) for respective assessment years deleting pe…

ITO, Ward-1(3), Thane vs. M/S. Vishvakarma Fabricators Prop. Ashwin A. Panchal, Mumbai

In the result, appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5046/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad

Section 271(1)(c)

…made on the basis of estimation and not on account of any concrete evidence of concealment, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be invoked. The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading Industries, reported as 360 ITR 581(Raj), taking a similar view held that where estimated additions are made, no penalty is leviable under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, in the light of the facts of the case and the decisions 4 ITA NO.5047/MUM/2019(A.Y.2011-12) referred above, we find no infirmity in the impugned orders of CIT(A) for respective assessment years deleting pe…