CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd.

272 ITR 545High Court2005#2083 most cited

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.

55

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. · 272 ITR 545 · Section 271C penalty · deletion of penalty · failure to deduct tax at source · contumacious conduct · reasonable cause · Section 273B · Delhi High Court · no substantial question of law

Sections most often in play

Section 194CSection 201(1A)Section 271CSection 273BSection 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 12

Issues it is cited on

compensatory interestsection 206asection 206aasection 10(46)section 10(20)section 271csection 197asection 194csection 201(1a)interest under section 201(1a)section 273bsection 197

Judgments citing CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd.

Pivotal Infrastructure Ltd, Gurgaon vs. Addi. CIT Spl. Range 76, New Delhi

The appeal are allowed

ITA 6261/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 6261/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15

Section 133ASection 194CSection 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…

Ts Realtech Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Range -76, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 4942/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4940/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 4941/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 4942/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18 T.S. Realtech Private Vs. Acit, Limited Range-76 E-26, Panchsheel Park New Delhi New Delhi – 110017 Pan : Aadck3222C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271Section 271C

…rt of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of 10 ITA No. 4940 & Ors. T.S.Realtech P. Ltd. 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…

Ts Realtech Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Range -76, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 4941/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4940/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 4941/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 4942/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18 T.S. Realtech Private Vs. Acit, Limited Range-76 E-26, Panchsheel Park New Delhi New Delhi – 110017 Pan : Aadck3222C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271Section 271C

…rt of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of 10 ITA No. 4940 & Ors. T.S.Realtech P. Ltd. 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…

Ts Realtech Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Range -76, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 4940/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4940/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 4941/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 4942/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18 T.S. Realtech Private Vs. Acit, Limited Range-76 E-26, Panchsheel Park New Delhi New Delhi – 110017 Pan : Aadck3222C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271Section 271C

…rt of the assessee. We find that on similar facts Hon'ble Delhi High Court have deleted levy of 10 ITA No. 4940 & Ors. T.S.Realtech P. Ltd. 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…

Tulip Infratech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Special Range-76, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6736/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6734/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.6735/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Ita No.6736/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18

Section 133ASection 194CSection 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…

Tulip Infratech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Special Range-76, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6735/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6734/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.6735/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Ita No.6736/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18

Section 133ASection 194CSection 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…

Tulip Infratech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Special Range-76, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6734/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6734/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.6735/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Ita No.6736/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18

Section 133ASection 194CSection 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

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6653/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmatdi Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, 10, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Marg, Range-76, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi- 110001 Pan : Aaaci5799P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 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." Being aggrieved, the Revenue took up the matter before the High 3. Court of Delhi against the order of the Inco…

Vatika Sovereign Park Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-26(1), New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 7252/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.7251 & 7252/Del/2019 (Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vatika Sovereign Park Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, 621A, 6Th Floor, Devika Towers Circle-26(1) 6-Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi-110019 Pan No. Aafcp9383D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 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…

Vatika Sovereign Park Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-26(1), New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 7251/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.7251 & 7252/Del/2019 (Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vatika Sovereign Park Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, 621A, 6Th Floor, Devika Towers Circle-26(1) 6-Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi-110019 Pan No. Aafcp9383D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 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…

M/S. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society, Lucknow vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 16/LKW/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S Sahara Credit Cooperative V. Jcit (Tds) Society Lucknow Kapoorthala Complex Aliganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Lknso9775D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri J.J. Mehrotra, C.A. & Shri Debashish Mehrotra, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17 12 2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07 01 2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri J.J. Mehrotra, C.A. and ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271CSection 273B

…nduct 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 M/s. Itochu Corporation, reported in 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT Vs. Mitsui & Company Ltd. reported in 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.” 12. No decision contrary to the above case laws cited on behalf of the assessee has cited before us. Therefore, r…

Santur Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Range-77, New Delhi

ITA 6844/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Ms. Ashisha Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 273BSection 275(1)(c)

…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…

Sahara India Financial Corpn. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed

ITA 3510/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, Adv. and Shri A.T. Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjog Kapoor, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 272ASection 272A(1)(c)Section 273B

…automatic if there are good and sufficient reasons for any failure. There is no justification in levying penalty. The appellant would also like t place reliance on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of: C.I.T. v. Mitsui And Co. Ltd. And Another 272 ITR 545 (Del.) C.I.T. v. Raunaq & Co. (P.) Ltd. 140 ITR 407 pp 411 (Del.) 8. The L’d Counsel of the appellant stressed on the fact that in response to summon dated 12.10.2007 substantial information was furnished by the appellant but the entire information could not be furnished due to paucity o time. It was further stressed that post issue of summon dat…

Sahara India Financial Corpn. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed

ITA 3511/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, Adv. and Shri A.T. Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjog Kapoor, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 272ASection 272A(1)(c)Section 273B

…automatic if there are good and sufficient reasons for any failure. There is no justification in levying penalty. The appellant would also like t place reliance on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of: C.I.T. v. Mitsui And Co. Ltd. And Another 272 ITR 545 (Del.) C.I.T. v. Raunaq & Co. (P.) Ltd. 140 ITR 407 pp 411 (Del.) 8. The L’d Counsel of the appellant stressed on the fact that in response to summon dated 12.10.2007 substantial information was furnished by the appellant but the entire information could not be furnished due to paucity o time. It was further stressed that post issue of summon dat…

Addl. CIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S Punjab & Sindh Bank, Noida

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5979/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiaddl. Cit, Vs. Punjab & Sindh Bank, Tds, Ghaziabad Sector-18, Noida Pan: Aaacp1206G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 275

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Addl. CIT, Vs. Punjab & Sindh Bank, TDS, Ghaziabad Sector-18, Noida PAN: AAACP1206G (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR Assessee by: None Date of Hearing 31/07/2019 Date of pronouncement 22/10/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the ld CIT(A)-I, New Delhi dated 29.07.2016 for the Assessment Year 2005-06 wherein the penalty levied by the learned additional Commissioner of…

Sarv Estate Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT Range-77, New Delhi

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

ITA 5338/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 196Section 271CSection 3

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 5337 & 5338/Del/2019 Asstt. Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 M/s. Sarv Estate Pvt. Ltd. JCIT, Range 77, Central Wing, GF, New Delhi. Thapar House, 124, PAN AAQCS0231G Janpath, Vs. New Delhi – 110 001. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate, Ms. Tejasavi Jain, CA and Ms. Somaya Jain, CA Department by : Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20/08/2019 Date of 13/09/2019 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeals have bee…

Sarv Estate Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT Range-77, New Delhi

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

ITA 5337/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 196Section 271CSection 3

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 5337 & 5338/Del/2019 Asstt. Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 M/s. Sarv Estate Pvt. Ltd. JCIT, Range 77, Central Wing, GF, New Delhi. Thapar House, 124, PAN AAQCS0231G Janpath, Vs. New Delhi – 110 001. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate, Ms. Tejasavi Jain, CA and Ms. Somaya Jain, CA Department by : Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20/08/2019 Date of 13/09/2019 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeals have bee…

Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-77, New Delhi

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

ITA 5713/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2019AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 196Section 271Section 271CSection 273B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., ACIT, Circle-77, L-7A(LGF), South Extension New Delhi Part-2, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN AAJCS5095B Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA Department by : Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21/08/2019 Date of 11/09/2019 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against impugned order dated 17.6.2019, passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals) 31,…

Jaipur National University, Jaipur vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1457/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena (JCIT)
Section 17(2)Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271CSection 273B

…nduct 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 M/s. Itochu Corporation, reported in 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT Vs. Mitsui & Company Ltd. reported in 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." 8. In view of the above facts and circumstances and keeping in view the provisions of Section 273B of the Act, I…

Jaipur National University, Jaipur vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1456/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena (JCIT)
Section 17(2)Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271CSection 273B

…nduct 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 M/s. Itochu Corporation, reported in 268 ITR 172 (Del) and in the case of CIT Vs. Mitsui & Company Ltd. reported in 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." 8. In view of the above facts and circumstances and keeping in view the provisions of Section 273B of the Act, I…