CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd.

327 ITR 543High Court2010#1049 most cited

What is CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. authority for?

When tax is levied under Section 115JB on book profits, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars can be imposed based on additions or disallowances made in the regular computation of income. The regular computation is only for comparative purposes when the final tax liability is based on book profits.

104

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. · Section 115JB · Section 271(1)(c) · penalty · book profits · MAT · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · additions regular assessment · tax on book profits · levy of penalty

Also reported as

194 Taxmann 387

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(1A)Section 35ADSection 153ASection 234B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

book profitssection 115jpenalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomesection 115jbpenalty u/s 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particularsconcealment of incomesection 115section 271(1)levy of penaltysection 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd.

Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited., Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1318/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 271(1)(c)

…alment did not lead to tax evasion per se. Therefore, no penalty could have been imposed on the assessee under the normal provisions of the Act. For this purpose, a reference was made to the judgment in the case of CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investment Limited (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Delhi). A reference was further made to the CBDT Circular No.25/2015 wherein the Board has clarified that in respect of cases prior to assessment year 2016-17, no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act needs to be imposed where the additions/disallowances were made under normal provisions of the Act but tax was levied under MAT provisions un…

Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited., Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1317/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 271(1)(c)

…alment did not lead to tax evasion per se. Therefore, no penalty could have been imposed on the assessee under the normal provisions of the Act. For this purpose, a reference was made to the judgment in the case of CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investment Limited (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Delhi). A reference was further made to the CBDT Circular No.25/2015 wherein the Board has clarified that in respect of cases prior to assessment year 2016-17, no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act needs to be imposed where the additions/disallowances were made under normal provisions of the Act but tax was levied under MAT provisions un…

M/S Wellknown Polysters Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-7(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1270/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa, D.R
Section 115JSection 271ASection 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Wellknown Polysters DCIT, Central Circle-7(4), Ltd., Room No.659, 14th Floor, B Wing, Vs. 6th Floor, Nirmal Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 021 M.K. Road, PAN: AAACW1018K Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle-7(4), M/s. Wellknown Polysters Room No.659, Ltd., 6th Floor, 14th Floor, B Wing, Aayakar Bhavan, Nirmal Buildling, Vs. M.K. Road, 241/242, Backbay Mumbai - 400020 R…

Dy CIT CC 4 (1), Mumbai vs. Centaur Merchantile Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 324/MUM/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood (Jm)

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…g followed by the assessee. The FAA equated the reduction of closing WIP to reduction of loss as envisaged in Explanation 4 to Section 271(1). The FAA also rejected the reliance placed by the assesse on the decision in the case of Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. (327 ITR 543) by distinguishing that in the said case, the income was assessed as per provisions of MAT u/s.115JB and not as per the normal provisions of the Act. Finally, the FAA confirmed the penalty levied by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Aggrieved by the order of the FAA confirming the penalty levied by the AO,…

DCIT, Circle- 12(1), New Delhi vs. Indian Sugar Exim Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3476/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anima Barnwal, Senior DR
Section 143Section 14ASection 254Section 271(1)(c)

…ssed income under MAT then no penalty is leviable for additions/disallowances made under the normal provisions and relied upon the decision 4 ITA No.3476/Del./2018 rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 543. 7. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, order passed by the lower authorities and arguments addressed by the authorized representatives of both the parties to the appeal, the sole question arises for determination in this case is:- “as to whether the assessee has concealed particulars of income or has furnishe…

M/S Aanya Real Estate Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 15 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and direct that the penalty in this case be deleted

ITA 115/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm M/S. Aanya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit 15(1)(1) R. No. 470, 4Th Floor, 120 A Wing 02, Commercial Building 23-24, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Minerva Industrial Estate, Aasha Nagar, Mumbai-400 020 Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080

For Appellant: Shri K. P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…7,44,509/- being same as income declared h the return u/s 115JBof IT. Act 1961. In respect to addition made under normal provision no penalty u/s 271(1 )(c) is leviable as there is no loss of revenue. Reliance on: i) Circular No.25/2015 dated 31/12/2015. ii) 327 ITR 543 (Delhi) GIT vs Nalwa Sons investments Ltd. iii) Supremg Court orderin SLP Civil No.18564/2011 in the case of Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. vide judgment dated 04/05/2012. iv) ITAT Delhi Bench In ITA No.1026/Del/2012 in the case of M/s. Century Communication Ltd. vide judgment dated 21/09/2012, 5. Perusal of assessment order does not show any satis…

Hda Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5617/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14]

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2013-14] M/s HDA Buildcon Pvt Ltd. Vs. The C.I.T[A]-35 28, 1st Floor, Deepali, New Delhi Pitampura, New Delhi, PAN : AACCH 4182 M [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 25.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 25.03.2021 Assessee by : Shri Satyajeet Goel, CA Revenue by : Shri Mahesh Thakur, Sr. DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commission…

M/S Shree Magnets Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-5(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2424/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2020AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 35

…For this proposition For this proposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Delh eliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of i High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Limited reported in 327 ITR 543 CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Limited reported in 327 ITR 543 CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Limited reported in 327 ITR 543 and the decision 3 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Shree Magnets Pvt. Ltd of the Jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of of the Jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Salasar Stock Broking Limited DCIT vs. Salasar…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Travelport Lp Usa, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue ITA No

ITA 218/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. N Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 260ASection 9(1)(i)

…he assessee u/s 115JA of the Act and the additions sustained pertaining only to the income computed under the normal provisions of the Act. The ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Del) to propel this submission. 14.2. Before proceeding with the matter on merit, it would be apposite to first decide about the maintainability or otherwise of such application. Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963 with its marginal note reads as under :- `Respondent may support order on grounds decided against him. The respondent, though he may not…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Travelport Lp Usa, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue ITA No

ITA 217/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. N Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 260ASection 9(1)(i)

…he assessee u/s 115JA of the Act and the additions sustained pertaining only to the income computed under the normal provisions of the Act. The ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Del) to propel this submission. 14.2. Before proceeding with the matter on merit, it would be apposite to first decide about the maintainability or otherwise of such application. Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963 with its marginal note reads as under :- `Respondent may support order on grounds decided against him. The respondent, though he may not…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Worldspan L.P. Usa, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue ITA No

ITA 6500/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. N Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 260ASection 9(1)(i)

…he assessee u/s 115JA of the Act and the additions sustained pertaining only to the income computed under the normal provisions of the Act. The ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Del) to propel this submission. 14.2. Before proceeding with the matter on merit, it would be apposite to first decide about the maintainability or otherwise of such application. Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963 with its marginal note reads as under :- `Respondent may support order on grounds decided against him. The respondent, though he may not…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Worldspan L.P. Usa, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue ITA No

ITA 6499/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. N Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 260ASection 9(1)(i)

…he assessee u/s 115JA of the Act and the additions sustained pertaining only to the income computed under the normal provisions of the Act. The ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Del) to propel this submission. 14.2. Before proceeding with the matter on merit, it would be apposite to first decide about the maintainability or otherwise of such application. Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963 with its marginal note reads as under :- `Respondent may support order on grounds decided against him. The respondent, though he may not…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Travelport L.P. Usa, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue ITA No

ITA 1480/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. N Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 260ASection 9(1)(i)

…he assessee u/s 115JA of the Act and the additions sustained pertaining only to the income computed under the normal provisions of the Act. The ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Del) to propel this submission. 14.2. Before proceeding with the matter on merit, it would be apposite to first decide about the maintainability or otherwise of such application. Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963 with its marginal note reads as under :- `Respondent may support order on grounds decided against him. The respondent, though he may not…

M/S Flemmingo Travel Retail Ltd.(Formerly Known As Dfs India P. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT - 9 (3) (2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1197/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Flemingo Travel Retail Dcit –9(3)(2) Room No. 418, 4Th Floor, Limited (Formerly Known As Dfs India Pvt. Ltd.), Chhatrapati Shivaji Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, International Airport, New Vs. Mumbai 400020 Terminal 2, Csi Airport, Sahar, Mumbai. Pan – Aaccd7412N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, Sr.D.R
Section 1Section 115JSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40Section 43(1)

…ve any bearing insofar the order under consideration was concerned i.e A.Y. 2014-15. In order to fortify its aforesaid claim the assessee had relied upon the judgment of the Hon‘ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Del). Further, it was brought to notice of the appellate authority that the ‗Special Leave petition‘ (SLP) filed by the revenue before Hon‘ble Supreme Court was dismissed as CIT Vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. [SLP (Civil) NO(s). 18564/2011; dated 04.05.2012]. However, the CIT(A) after deliberating on the contentions advanced by the assessee was…

DCIT - (Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6267/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Yadav &For Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh (CIT-DR)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…fits computed u/s 115JB of the Act. 14. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nalwa Investments Ltd., [2010] 327 ITR 543 (Del) had considered on identical issue and after considering the relevant provisions of the Act, held that when tax payable on income computed under normal provisions of the Act is less than tax payable under the provisions of Sec. 115JB of the Act, then penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act could not be imposed with reference to additions / disallow…

M/S.Kapil Rayon (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 4(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5946/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negikapil Rayon (India) Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Ito-4(2)(4) 6Th Floor 127/129, Room No.12-13 1St Floor, Old Hanuman Lane Aaykar Bhawan Kalbadevi M.K.Road Mumbai-400 002 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aabck5687M Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…of the Act, 1961, without appreciating the fact that the income of the assessee is assessed u/s 115JB of the Act at returned income, hence no penalty was imposed as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in the case of CIT vs Nalwa sons Investments Ltd (2010) 327 ITR 543 (Delhi) and also, as per the CBDT circular No. 25/2015, dated 31/12/2015. 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supported order of the Ld.CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in the case of Nalwa sons I…

Asst CIT Cir 1, Thane vs. Everest Industries Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1458/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1458/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / / / / Assessment Year:2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Assistant Commissioner Of M/S.Everest Industries Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, Circle-1, D-206,Sector-63, Thane. Noida,Uttar Pradesh 201 307. Pan: Aaace 7550 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R.Manjunatha Swamy,CIT D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain A.R
Section 115HSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…मुंबई । "यायपीठ , मुंबई यकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई मुंबई "यायपीठ आयकर यकर यकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई "यायपीठ "यायपीठ मुंबई मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.TA No.1458/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / / / / Assessment Year:2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Assistant Commissioner of M/s.Everest Industries Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, Circle-1, D-206,Sector-63, Thane. Noida,Uttar Pradesh 201 307. PAN: AAACE 7550 N (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appell…

The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Ltd., Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3315/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav&Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3315/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy. Cit M/S. Madhya Gujarat बनाम/ Cir-2(1)(2), 4Th Floor, Vij Co. Ltd. Vs. Sardar Patel Vidyut Aaykar Bhavan, Race Bhawan, Race Course, Course, Baroda- 390007 Baroda- 390007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aad Cm7 439 H .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: 30/08/2019
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43(1)Section 80I

…3(Guj.) and again similar decision was given. It may be mentioned here that the ITAT in its decision in the case of Gujarat State Fertilizer and Chemicals Ltd. (Supra) had relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. 327 ITR 543 (Del.). The SLP filed against this decision of Delhi High Court has been rejected by the Apex Court in its decision reported in 21 Taxman.com 184 (SC). The High Court in its decision in the case of Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. had held that where the assessment was made on income computed u/s. 115JB and tax has been paid on income so computed, pen…

Samin Tekmindz India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 22(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2282/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2011-12] M/S Samin Tekmindz India Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T 301, 3Rd Floor, A-115, Shakarpur Circle 22(1) New Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aalcs 0909 E [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…reply was filed. The Assessing Officer proceeded ex parte and levied penalty of Rs. 74,16,268/-. 5. The assessee agitated the matter before the CIT(A) and drew his attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Court in the case of Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd 327 ITR 543 and further pointed out that this judgment has been accepted by the CBDT vide its Circular No. 25/2015 dated 31.12.2015. 6. However, the CIT(A) was not convinced and was of the opinion that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Nalwa Sons Investment Limited [supra] does not apply where the deeming fiction of sectio…

M/S. Metenere Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1760/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2008-09] M/S Metenere Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T 138-19, Main Road Central Circle – 18, Ghazipur, Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aaacm 8484 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 234ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 2ySection 80

…has been levied on the additions made for computing the income u/s 143(3) of the Act. This issue is now well settled in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd 327 ITR 543. 8. The facts of the case in hand are also clearly covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the following Circular of the CBDT: “CIRCULAR NO. 25/2015 F.No.279/Misc./140/2015/ITJ Government of India Ministry of Finance Central Board of Direct Taxes New Delhi, 31st December, 2015 Subject: Penalty u/s 2yi(i)(c) wherein addition…