CIT v. Manu Engg

122 ITR 306High Court1980#133 most cited

What is CIT v. Manu Engg authority for?

When levying a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer must clearly specify whether it is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. An ambiguous notice or order using "and/or" for these limbs, or a standard proforma without striking irrelevant clauses, indicates non-application of mind and renders the penalty unsustainable.

505

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Manu Engg · Manu Engineering · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274 · levy of penalty · penalty notice · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars of income · ambiguous penalty order · non-application of mind · penalty unsustainable

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 132Section 153ASection 154

Issues it is cited on

section 271(l)section 271(l)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomepenalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particularssection 274non-application of mindconcealment of incomepenalty u/s 271(1)(c)levy of penaltysection 271(1)section 271

Judgments citing CIT v. Manu Engg

Nikhil Mulchand Chheda, Mumbai vs. ITO 20(2)4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 493/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri G Manjunatha () Nikhil Mulchand Chheda Vs Income-Tax Oficer-20(2)(4) 257/10, Champa Niwas Mumbai Station Road, Wadala (W) Mumbai 400 031 Pan : Aampc6244N Appellant Respondednt

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…pex court in the case of Ashok Pai reported (2007) 292 ITR 11 (SC) at page 19 has held that concealnment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of Manu Engineering reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of Virgo Marketing P.Ltd., reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to…

Moving Picture Company India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2896/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Sood, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Senior DR
Section 143Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of T Ashok Poi v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 11 /161 Taxman 340 at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Manu Engg. [1980] 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Virgo Marketing (P) Ltd. [2008] 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has…

M/S N N Jewellers, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-1, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in

ITA 66/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Mar 2019AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA)For Respondent: Ms. Anuradha (JCIT)
Section 1Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…e case of Ashok Pai reported in [2007] 292 ITR 11 (SC) at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of Manu Engineering Works reported in [1980] 122 ITR 306 (GUJ) and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Virgo Marketing P Ltd reported in [2008 171 Taxman 156 has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment then th…

M/S N N Jewellers, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-1, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in

ITA 64/JPR/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Mar 2019AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA)For Respondent: Ms. Anuradha (JCIT)
Section 1Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…e case of Ashok Pai reported in [2007] 292 ITR 11 (SC) at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of Manu Engineering Works reported in [1980] 122 ITR 306 (GUJ) and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Virgo Marketing P Ltd reported in [2008 171 Taxman 156 has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment then th…

S. Narendrakumar & Co., Mumbai vs. ACIT 22(2), Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7334/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Shri S Narendrakumar & Vs. Acit – 22(2) (Presently Co., Acit – 27(3), 5Th Floor, Krushal Vashi Railway Station Complex, Tower No.6, 4 Th Commercial Complex,G.M.Road, Floor, Vashi, Navi Mumbai – Chembur (W), Mumbai – 400 703 400 089 Pan/Gir No.Aaafs1245B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…i reported in [2007] 292 ITR 11 (SC) at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry 7 Shri S. Narendrakumar &Co., different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of Manu Engineering reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of Virgo Marketing P. Ltd., reported in 171 Taxmn 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to…

Sri Suresh Rao Sathe.S, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2193/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri. Suresh Rao Sathe S, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of No.16, 7Th Main, Income Tax, Indiranagar 2Nd Stage, Circle – 1(2)(1), Bengaluru – 560 038. Bengaluru – 560 095. Pan : Abips 1070 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajeev C. Nulvi, Ca Revenue By : Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 18.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019

For Appellant: Shri. Rajeev C. Nulvi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2009-10 Shri. Suresh Rao Sathe S, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of No.16, 7th Main, Income Tax, Indiranagar 2nd Stage, Circle – 1(2)(1), Bengaluru – 560 038. Bengaluru – 560 095. PAN : ABIPS 1070 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Rajeev C. Nulvi, CA Revenue by : Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 18.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz, A.M. : This appeal by the assessee is directed against…

Chitralekha, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.- 17(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 6849/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6849/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) M/S. Chitralekha Asstt. Commissioner Of 25, Andheri Industrial Estate Income Tax -17(1) बनाम/ Near Janki Centre Room No.117 Vs. Off Veera Desai Road Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 053 Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafc-1152-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Appellant By : Ms. Aarti Vissanji-Ld.Ar Respondent By : Abhi Ram Kartikeyan - Ld.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 14/03/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 19/03/2019 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Abhi Ram Kartikeyan - Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(iii)

…lars. The apex court in the case of Ashok Pai[2007] 292 ITR 11 (SC) at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of Manu Engineering reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of Virgo Marketing P. Ltd., reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has t…

Sri Terence Hamilton Ireland, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 22(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1885/KOL/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2003-04

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S, Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2003-04 Sri Terence Hamilton Income Tax Officer, बनाम / Ireland, C/o St. James Ward-22(1), Bamboo V/s. School, 165, A.J.C. Bose Villa,169, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-14 Road, Kolkat-14 [PAN No.AAJPI 3702 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT-SR-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for ass…

Shri Narandar Pugalia, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 2622/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth G.S., CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswarajan Sasmal, CIT
Section 10(38)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ars. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pai reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of MANU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO MARKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appr…

Shri Roopchand Pugalia, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 2621/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth G.S., CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswarajan Sasmal, CIT
Section 10(38)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ars. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pai reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of MANU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO MARKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appr…

M/S Stump Schuele and Somappa Springs Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13

ITA 1604/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Stumpp Schuele & Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Somappa Springs Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Ltu, No.139/2, Hosur Road, Circle - 1, Koramangala, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 095. Pan : Aalcs 7347 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sowmya, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. M. Rajasekhar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2019 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boazthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Cit(A)-10, Bangalore, Dated 01.02.2018 For Assessment Year 2012-13, Upholding The Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Briefly Stated, The Facts Relevant For Disposal Of This Appeal Are As Under: Page 2 Of 9 2.1 The Assessee, A Company Engaged In The Manufacture & Supply Of Stabilizer Bars & All Varieties Of Springs, Automobile Components, Spare Parts, Accessories, Etc., Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 Declaring Loss Of (-) Rs.5,34,42,031/- Under Normal Provisions & ‘Book Profits’ Of Rs.2,88,52,729/- Under Section 115Jb Of The Act. The Case Was Taken Up For Assessment For This Assessment Year & The Assessment Was Concluded Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 13.03.2015, Wherein The Assessee’S Loss Was Determined At Rs.4,55,68,066/- In View Of The Following Additions / Deductions:- (I) Disallowance Of Deduction Under Section 35(2Ab) – Rs.14,34,982/- (Ii) Disallowance Of Leave Encashment – Rs.64,38,983/-.

For Appellant: Smt. Sowmya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. M. Rajasekhar, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 35

…rs. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pal reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that. concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of M4NU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO IvL4RKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the action being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriatel…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2859/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

…rs. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pal reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that. concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of M4NU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO IvL4RKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the action being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriatel…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2858/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

…rs. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pal reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that. concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of M4NU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO IvL4RKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the action being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriatel…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2857/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

…rs. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pal reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that. concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of M4NU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO IvL4RKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the action being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriatel…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2856/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

…rs. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pal reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that. concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of M4NU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO IvL4RKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the action being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriatel…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2855/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

…rs. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pal reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that. concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of M4NU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO IvL4RKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the action being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriatel…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belgavi

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2854/BANG/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

…rs. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pal reported in 292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that. concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of M4NU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO IvL4RKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the action being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriatel…

Sri Rakesh Singh, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1478/BANG/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Mar 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri. J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri. Laliet Kumari.T.A Nos.1478 & 1479/Bang/2018 (Assessment Year : 2001-02 & 2004-05) Sri Rakesh Singh, L/R Of Late Sri Lakhan Singh, No.2, 4Th Floor, R. R. Chambers, Vasanthanagar, Bengaluru .. Appellant Pan : Ardps8589G V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 6 (3), Bengaluru .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. Cit Heard On : 04.03.2019 Pronounced On : 04.03.2019 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar: The Present Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Passed By The Cit (A) Dt.15.02.2018, For The Assessment Years 2001-02 & 2004-05 Respectively, Involving A Common Issue With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S.271(1)(C) , Which Was Confirmed By The Cit (A).

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…e case of Ashok Pai reported in [2007] 292 ITR 11 (SC) at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of Manu Engineering Works reported in [1980] 122 ITR 306 (Guj) and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Virgo Marketing P. Ltd. reported in [2008] 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, th…

M/S. Honeywell Automation India Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/PUN/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Haldar
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…reported as 292 ITR 11 has held that concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income in section 271(1) (c) of the Act carry different meanings/connotations. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manu Engineering reported as 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of Virgo Marketing P. Ltd. reported in 171 taxman 156 has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has…

Lodhi Property Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1232/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Dr. M.L. Meena

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Senior DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of T Ashok Poi v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 11 /161 Taxman 340 at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Manu Engg. [1980] 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Virgo Marketing (P) Ltd. [2008] 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb for which it is levied and the position being unclear penalty is not sustainable. Therefore, when the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has…