What is CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. authority for?

Penalty under Section 271C for failure to deduct tax at source is not leviable unless contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee is established. Where such conduct is not proven, the High Court upholds the deletion of the penalty.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd.?

55 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. (272 ITR 545), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 194C, Section 201(1A), Section 271C, Section 273B, Section 10(20), Section 10(46).

CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. (272 ITR 545)

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH), UDAIPUR

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 114/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the said demand by stating that the VFPMCs are not contractors under Section 194C, as they are formed under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953, and function as self-help groups for forest conservation and development. The payments made to VFPMCs are not contract payments but are reimbursements for work done under the joint forest management policy of the State Government.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 80P

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SOUTH, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 113/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 80P

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

SHYAM COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-77, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2020/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad:Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 119Section 194CSection 196Section 271C

…hat there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 8 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India 8 ITA No.2020/Del./2023 Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi again…

ITO WARD-77(3), NEW DELHI vs. STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue/Department stands dismissed

ITA 1236/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…ous conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble 16 ITA no. 9282/Del/2019 Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545.” 8 Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the I…

ITO(TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 360/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 359/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 358/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

VIRESH PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7436/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7436/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271C

…I.T.A.No.7436/Del/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7436/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Viresh Promoters & Developers P. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT LGF-10, Vasant Square Mall, Plot-A, Range-78, Sector-B, Pocket-V, New Delhi. Community Centre, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. PAN No. AACCV2736K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent S/Shri Ved Jain, Adv. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Aman Garg, CA Ms. Supriya Mehta, CA Shri M. Baranwal, CIT DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by & Shri Sanjay…

DCIT CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI vs. OMAXE LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue/Department stands

ITA 9282/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 194CSection 250Section 271C

…t there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble 16 Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545.” Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Inc…

ITO, TDS WARD 74(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI POLICE, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals of revenue are disposed of

ITA 8064/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri J K Handa, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan Sr.DR

Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 274

…dgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia 380 ITR 550 (SC) and judgement of Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs ITOCHU Corp., reported as 268 ITR 172 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Mistui & Co. Ltd., reported as 272 ITR 545. 5. On careful consideration above submissions from the first appellate order we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has granted the relief to the assessee with following observations and findings:- 10.1 It is trite law that penalty proceedings have to be strictly construed. For this proposition I rely upon the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case…

ITO, TDS, WARD-74(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI POLICE, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals of revenue are disposed of

ITA 8063/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri J K Handa, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan Sr.DR

Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 274

…dgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia 380 ITR 550 (SC) and judgement of Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs ITOCHU Corp., reported as 268 ITR 172 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Mistui & Co. Ltd., reported as 272 ITR 545. 5. On careful consideration above submissions from the first appellate order we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has granted the relief to the assessee with following observations and findings:- 10.1 It is trite law that penalty proceedings have to be strictly construed. For this proposition I rely upon the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case…

REGARDS DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6535/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 6535/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Regards Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 895, Nai Sarak, Range-78, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccr5651D Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.11.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271CSection 40

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Incom…

PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE 76, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and penalty imposed by the A

ITA 6262/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 6262/Del/2019 (A.Y 2017-18)

Section 143(3)Section 271

…1 Pivotal Infrastructure Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH : “F” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 6262/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2017-18) Addl. CIT Pivotal Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Special Range 76, 3rd Floor, 309, 3rd Floor, JMD Pacific Square Ayakar Bhawan, District Sec-15, Part-II, Gurgaon, Haryana Centre, Laxmi Nagar PAN No. AADCP9575F New Delhi (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) Appellant by Sh. Vijay Singla, CA Respondent by Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr DR Date of Hearing 28.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement 30.11.2022 ORDER PER…

SHREE VARDHMAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT RANGE-77, NEW DELHI

ITA 1957/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmashree Vardhman Developers Vs. Jcit, Private Limited, Range-77 301-311, Indraprakash Building, New Delhi 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan : Aaccv1495M Appellant Respondent

Section 156Section 194CSection 250Section 271CSection 273B

…on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 Shree Vardhman Developers P. Ltd. 8 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before 3. the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Incom…

SIRUR DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT(TDS), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1164/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Present on behalf of Shri Alok Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal

Section 271C

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Incom…

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5872/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: [CIT] - D. R

Section 196Section 271C

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5871/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: [CIT] - D. R

Section 196Section 271C

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

TDI REALCON PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5769/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal

Section 196Section 271C

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

TDI REALCON PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5768/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal

Section 196Section 271C

…that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

VIPUL LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 1856/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Vipul Ltd., Vs. Acit Vipul Tech Square, Golf Circle-26(2) Course Road, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122009 Pan : Aaaca5396C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 196Section 40

…tumacious conduct on the part of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of penalty u/s 271-C in the M/s. Vipul Ltd. 7 case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the Income…

CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd.

What is CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH), UDAIPUR

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SOUTH, UDAIPUR

SHYAM COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-77, NEW DELHI

ITO WARD-77(3), NEW DELHI vs. STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITO(TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

VIRESH PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

DCIT CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI vs. OMAXE LTD. , NEW DELHI

ITO, TDS WARD 74(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI POLICE, NEW DELHI

ITO, TDS, WARD-74(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI POLICE, NEW DELHI

REGARDS DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE 76, NEW DELHI

SHREE VARDHMAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT RANGE-77, NEW DELHI

SIRUR DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT(TDS), DELHI

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

TDI REALCON PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

TDI REALCON PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

VIPUL LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI