CIT v. Mac Data Ltd.

352 ITR 1High Court2013#3278 most cited

What is CIT v. Mac Data Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer must be satisfied before initiating penalty proceedings, though this satisfaction need not be in writing. Voluntary disclosure of income does not absolve the assessee from penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) if the income was already discovered.

36

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Mac Data Ltd. · 352 ITR 1 · penalty under section 271(1)(c) · satisfaction for initiation of penalty · voluntary disclosure of income · negative cash balance · penalty under section 271d

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271epenalty under section 271dsatisfaction for initiation of penaltyconstruction pesection 269tsection 269ssection 271esection 275(1)corpus fundon money receiptsection 53section 275(1)(c)

Judgments citing CIT v. Mac Data Ltd.

Nirala Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

ITA 3155/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Rahul Khare, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…reproduced in earlier part of this order, and we have noticed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) derives support from the precedents in the cases of MAK Data P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593/ 2013-TIOL-58-SC-IT, CIT v MAK Data P Ltd. 31 Taxman. Com 35 (Del)/352 ITR 1(Del), CIT v Acrotech Ltd. 42 Taxmann.com 20(Delhi), CIT v NG Technologies Ltd. 2014-TIOL-2182-HC-Del-IT, CIT v Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg Ltd. 2014-TIOL-536-HC-Del-IT. The Ld. Counsel for Assessee did not bring any material for our consideration to warrant any interference with order of Ld. CIT(A) as far as her decision to confirm the penalty U/s…

M/S. Nirala Housing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

ITA 3137/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Rahul Khare, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…reproduced in earlier part of this order, and we have noticed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) derives support from the precedents in the cases of MAK Data P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593/ 2013-TIOL-58-SC-IT, CIT v MAK Data P Ltd. 31 Taxman. Com 35 (Del)/352 ITR 1(Del), CIT v Acrotech Ltd. 42 Taxmann.com 20(Delhi), CIT v NG Technologies Ltd. 2014-TIOL-2182-HC-Del-IT, CIT v Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg Ltd. 2014-TIOL-536-HC-Del-IT. The Ld. Counsel for Assessee did not bring any material for our consideration to warrant any interference with order of Ld. CIT(A) as far as her decision to confirm the penalty U/s…

M/S. Nirala Housing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

ITA 3136/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Rahul Khare, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…reproduced in earlier part of this order, and we have noticed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) derives support from the precedents in the cases of MAK Data P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593/ 2013-TIOL-58-SC-IT, CIT v MAK Data P Ltd. 31 Taxman. Com 35 (Del)/352 ITR 1(Del), CIT v Acrotech Ltd. 42 Taxmann.com 20(Delhi), CIT v NG Technologies Ltd. 2014-TIOL-2182-HC-Del-IT, CIT v Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg Ltd. 2014-TIOL-536-HC-Del-IT. The Ld. Counsel for Assessee did not bring any material for our consideration to warrant any interference with order of Ld. CIT(A) as far as her decision to confirm the penalty U/s…

M/S. Nirala Housing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

ITA 3135/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Rahul Khare, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…reproduced in earlier part of this order, and we have noticed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) derives support from the precedents in the cases of MAK Data P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593/ 2013-TIOL-58-SC-IT, CIT v MAK Data P Ltd. 31 Taxman. Com 35 (Del)/352 ITR 1(Del), CIT v Acrotech Ltd. 42 Taxmann.com 20(Delhi), CIT v NG Technologies Ltd. 2014-TIOL-2182-HC-Del-IT, CIT v Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg Ltd. 2014-TIOL-536-HC-Del-IT. The Ld. Counsel for Assessee did not bring any material for our consideration to warrant any interference with order of Ld. CIT(A) as far as her decision to confirm the penalty U/s…

Sh. Karan Khurana, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2698/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Dass, Senior DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…fide and penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not leviable.” 15. Furthermore, the AO has based its entire order on first part of clause (A) of Explanation 1 of section 271(1)(c) by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Mak Data Ltd. – 352 ITR 1. 16. Undisputedly, the AO has imposed penalty on the assessee for furnishing “inaccurate particulars of income” which fact is not discernible from the notice issued u/s 274 of the Act itself nor it is (supra) case it is based upon the fact that the penalty was levied for concealment of particulars of income, whereas, in the instant case, the pena…

Sh. Karan Khurana, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2697/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Dass, Senior DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…fide and penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not leviable.” 15. Furthermore, the AO has based its entire order on first part of clause (A) of Explanation 1 of section 271(1)(c) by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Mak Data Ltd. – 352 ITR 1. 16. Undisputedly, the AO has imposed penalty on the assessee for furnishing “inaccurate particulars of income” which fact is not discernible from the notice issued u/s 274 of the Act itself nor it is (supra) case it is based upon the fact that the penalty was levied for concealment of particulars of income, whereas, in the instant case, the pena…

Sh. Karan Khurana, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2696/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Dass, Senior DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…fide and penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not leviable.” 15. Furthermore, the AO has based its entire order on first part of clause (A) of Explanation 1 of section 271(1)(c) by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Mak Data Ltd. – 352 ITR 1. 16. Undisputedly, the AO has imposed penalty on the assessee for furnishing “inaccurate particulars of income” which fact is not discernible from the notice issued u/s 274 of the Act itself nor it is (supra) case it is based upon the fact that the penalty was levied for concealment of particulars of income, whereas, in the instant case, the pena…

Sh. Karan Khurana, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2695/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Dass, Senior DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…fide and penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not leviable.” 15. Furthermore, the AO has based its entire order on first part of clause (A) of Explanation 1 of section 271(1)(c) by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Mak Data Ltd. – 352 ITR 1. 16. Undisputedly, the AO has imposed penalty on the assessee for furnishing “inaccurate particulars of income” which fact is not discernible from the notice issued u/s 274 of the Act itself nor it is (supra) case it is based upon the fact that the penalty was levied for concealment of particulars of income, whereas, in the instant case, the pena…

M/S Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 548/ASR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 548/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 548/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills, Vs. Asst. CIT, Sidco Industrial Complex, Central Circle, Bari Brahmana, Jammu Jammu [PAN: AABFK 4948A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.) Respondent by: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.) Date of Hearing: 21.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 09.05.2018 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Inc…

Tripat Kaur, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1833/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…s. [2013] 359 ITR 565 and CIT vs. M/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows, the proceedings are contrary to the law and are liable to be quashed. 5. Ld. DR placed reliance on the decisions relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) in his order and more particularly Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. 352 ITR 1 (Del.). 6. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions on either side. There is no dispute as to the facts submitted by the assessee to the effect that in the search that was conducted on 28.07.2011 nothing incriminatory could be found against the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that when the assessee added certain amount…

Tripat Kaur, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1832/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…s. [2013] 359 ITR 565 and CIT vs. M/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows, the proceedings are contrary to the law and are liable to be quashed. 5. Ld. DR placed reliance on the decisions relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) in his order and more particularly Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. 352 ITR 1 (Del.). 6. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions on either side. There is no dispute as to the facts submitted by the assessee to the effect that in the search that was conducted on 28.07.2011 nothing incriminatory could be found against the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that when the assessee added certain amount…

Tripat Kaur, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1831/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…s. [2013] 359 ITR 565 and CIT vs. M/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows, the proceedings are contrary to the law and are liable to be quashed. 5. Ld. DR placed reliance on the decisions relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) in his order and more particularly Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. 352 ITR 1 (Del.). 6. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions on either side. There is no dispute as to the facts submitted by the assessee to the effect that in the search that was conducted on 28.07.2011 nothing incriminatory could be found against the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that when the assessee added certain amount…

Tripat Kaur, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1830/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…s. [2013] 359 ITR 565 and CIT vs. M/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows, the proceedings are contrary to the law and are liable to be quashed. 5. Ld. DR placed reliance on the decisions relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) in his order and more particularly Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. 352 ITR 1 (Del.). 6. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions on either side. There is no dispute as to the facts submitted by the assessee to the effect that in the search that was conducted on 28.07.2011 nothing incriminatory could be found against the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that when the assessee added certain amount…

Tripat Kaur, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1829/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…s. [2013] 359 ITR 565 and CIT vs. M/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows, the proceedings are contrary to the law and are liable to be quashed. 5. Ld. DR placed reliance on the decisions relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) in his order and more particularly Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. 352 ITR 1 (Del.). 6. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions on either side. There is no dispute as to the facts submitted by the assessee to the effect that in the search that was conducted on 28.07.2011 nothing incriminatory could be found against the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that when the assessee added certain amount…

Pramukh Realtors, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3304/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Pramukh Relators Acit-15(2), 1301, G Wing Kamla Vihar, 1St Floor, R. No. 113, Vs. Borsa Pada, Mahavir Matru Mandir, Nagar, Kandivali (W), Tardeo Road, Grant Mumbai-400067. Road (W), Mumbai-400007 Pan No. Aagfp3465N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sanjay R. Parikh, Ar Revenue By : Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/06/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/09/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay R. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69C

…n has been enacted to 5 provide for a remedy for loss of revenue. The penalty under that provision is a civil liability. The above principle of law has been reiterated in Mak Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC), affirming CIT vs. Mak Data Ltd. (2013) 352 ITR 1 (Del). Coming back to the facts of the case, we find that the assessee-firm has not filed any appeal before the appellate authority against the addition of Rs.10,95,106/- made by the AO on account of bogus purchase. The fact remains that the addition has been made by the AO on account of bogus purchase from hawala parties. 7.2 Examined on the touch…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 4 vs. M/S Iibs Infonet Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/585/2016HC Delhi14 Sept 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 133ASection 260A

…bunal relied upon the decision reported as CIT vs. S Khakder Khan reported as (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Madras) and CIT, Ranchi vs. Ravindra Kumar Jain reported in (2009) 33 SOT 251 (Del). The revenue urges that the decision in CIT vs. MAK Data Pvt. Ltd.(2013) 352 ITR 1 (Del) was overlooked. It is stated that the Court in that judgment ruled that such statements can be the sole basis for completing assessment and adding to the income of the assessee. This court has considered the submissions. During the course of hearing, the revenue had relied on MAK Data vs. CIT 358 ITR 593 (SC). In that case the surve…