What is CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers authority for?

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied when the quantum appeal is pending before the High Court or where a quantum addition is confirmed and a question of law is admitted by the High Court.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers?

80 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers (368 ITR 722), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 271(1)(c), Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 274, Section 144C, Section 28(v).

CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers (368 ITR 722)

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2175/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No. Name of Appellant Name of Asst. No. Respondent Year Shri Datta Shetkari 1-7 2169/PUN/2025 DCIT, Circle-1, 2007-08 2170/PUN/2025 Sahakari Sakhar Kolhapur. 2008-09 2171/PUN/2025 2009-10 Karkhana Ltd., 2172/PUN/2025 2010-11 Gat No.230-231, At Post 2173/PUN/2025 2012-13 Dattanagar, Dattanagar, 2174/PUN/2025 2014-15 Shirol- 416120. 2175/PUN/2025 2013-14 PAN : AAAAS0597B Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 11.12.2025 Dat…

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2173/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No. Name of Appellant Name of Asst. No. Respondent Year Shri Datta Shetkari 1-7 2169/PUN/2025 DCIT, Circle-1, 2007-08 2170/PUN/2025 Sahakari Sakhar Kolhapur. 2008-09 2171/PUN/2025 2009-10 Karkhana Ltd., 2172/PUN/2025 2010-11 Gat No.230-231, At Post 2173/PUN/2025 2012-13 Dattanagar, Dattanagar, 2174/PUN/2025 2014-15 Shirol- 416120. 2175/PUN/2025 2013-14 PAN : AAAAS0597B Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 11.12.2025 Dat…

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2172/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No. Name of Appellant Name of Asst. No. Respondent Year Shri Datta Shetkari 1-7 2169/PUN/2025 DCIT, Circle-1, 2007-08 2170/PUN/2025 Sahakari Sakhar Kolhapur. 2008-09 2171/PUN/2025 2009-10 Karkhana Ltd., 2172/PUN/2025 2010-11 Gat No.230-231, At Post 2173/PUN/2025 2012-13 Dattanagar, Dattanagar, 2174/PUN/2025 2014-15 Shirol- 416120. 2175/PUN/2025 2013-14 PAN : AAAAS0597B Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 11.12.2025 Dat…

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2170/PUN/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No. Name of Appellant Name of Asst. No. Respondent Year Shri Datta Shetkari 1-7 2169/PUN/2025 DCIT, Circle-1, 2007-08 2170/PUN/2025 Sahakari Sakhar Kolhapur. 2008-09 2171/PUN/2025 2009-10 Karkhana Ltd., 2172/PUN/2025 2010-11 Gat No.230-231, At Post 2173/PUN/2025 2012-13 Dattanagar, Dattanagar, 2174/PUN/2025 2014-15 Shirol- 416120. 2175/PUN/2025 2013-14 PAN : AAAAS0597B Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 11.12.2025 Dat…

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Shirol vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2169/PUN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No. Name of Appellant Name of Asst. No. Respondent Year Shri Datta Shetkari 1-7 2169/PUN/2025 DCIT, Circle-1, 2007-08 2170/PUN/2025 Sahakari Sakhar Kolhapur. 2008-09 2171/PUN/2025 2009-10 Karkhana Ltd., 2172/PUN/2025 2010-11 Gat No.230-231, At Post 2173/PUN/2025 2012-13 Dattanagar, Dattanagar, 2174/PUN/2025 2014-15 Shirol- 416120. 2175/PUN/2025 2013-14 PAN : AAAAS0597B Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 11.12.2025 Dat…

T.L. Sritharan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-14, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2634/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2634/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Year: 2014-15 T.L. Sritharan, The Asst. Commissioner Of New No.13, Old No.1, Vs. Income Tax, Swaminathan Street, Non Corporate Circle-14, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 033. Pan: Aepps 6766J

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.Raghupathy, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 45Section 50C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम) BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2634/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Year: 2014-15 T.L. Sritharan, The Asst. Commissioner of New No.13, Old No.1, Vs. Income Tax, Swaminathan Street, Non corporate circle-14, West mambalam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 033. PAN: AEPPS 6766J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate IJथ" की ओर से /Respondent by…

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals by the Revenue having common ground are dismissed

ITA 5674/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: None

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…essee with the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 3 Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited 5.2. For giving the above finding, we draw force from the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Nayan Builders & Developers 368 ITR 722 (Bom) who held that where the quantum appeal is pending before the Hon’ble High Court, penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not leviable. Similarly, before the coordinate bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of DCIT LTU v. Reliance Industries Ltd in ITA Nos. 6267- 6269/Mum/2018 who after considering plethora of judicial precedents including that of Nay…

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals by the Revenue having common ground are dismissed

ITA 5673/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: None

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…essee with the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 3 Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited 5.2. For giving the above finding, we draw force from the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Nayan Builders & Developers 368 ITR 722 (Bom) who held that where the quantum appeal is pending before the Hon’ble High Court, penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not leviable. Similarly, before the coordinate bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of DCIT LTU v. Reliance Industries Ltd in ITA Nos. 6267- 6269/Mum/2018 who after considering plethora of judicial precedents including that of Nay…

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 894/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…stantial question of law by the Hon’ble High Court shows that the issue is debatable in nature and therefore, penalty on such issue cannot be levied. − CIT v. Liquid Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA…

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 893/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…stantial question of law by the Hon’ble High Court shows that the issue is debatable in nature and therefore, penalty on such issue cannot be levied. − CIT v. Liquid Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA…

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 892/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…stantial question of law by the Hon’ble High Court shows that the issue is debatable in nature and therefore, penalty on such issue cannot be levied. − CIT v. Liquid Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA…

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 891/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…stantial question of law by the Hon’ble High Court shows that the issue is debatable in nature and therefore, penalty on such issue cannot be levied. − CIT v. Liquid Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA…

M/S.Redington Distributors Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 890/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…stantial question of law by the Hon’ble High Court shows that the issue is debatable in nature and therefore, penalty on such issue cannot be levied. − CIT v. Liquid Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA…

M/S.Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 889/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…stantial question of law by the Hon’ble High Court shows that the issue is debatable in nature and therefore, penalty on such issue cannot be levied. − CIT v. Liquid Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA…

Nayankumar Jayantilal Balu, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 184/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui- Sr. DR

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 184/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Nayankumar Jayantilal Balu, Room No. 1, 1st Floor, 72, Bhavnagiri Building, Nanubhai Desai Road, Corner of Ardeshidad Street, Maharashtra-400004. PAN: AUDPB2495B Vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, 245A, North Block, New Delhi-110001 Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant/Assessee by : Shri Rushabh Mehta, AR Revenue / Respondent by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui- Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.04.2025 ORDER Per Padmavathy S, AM: This…

Poonam Gupta, Gwalior vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Gwalior

Appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 215/AGR/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Apr 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE :SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 Poonam Gupta, 61 Laxmi Bai Vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Colony, Gwalior. Gwalior PAN :ACOPG5442Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Anurag Sinha, Advocate Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 27.03.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.04.2025 ORDER Per Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Bhop…

Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2144/PUN/2024[AY 2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Central Circle 2(1), Vs. Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Dcit, Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Vs. Central Circle 2(1), Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Cit & Shri Arvind Desai, Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 23-01-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – CIT and Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245DSection 245D(4)Section 245HSection 271(1)(c)

…ted that treating the issue of residential status as a part and parcel of issue of concealment of income is not in accordance with law. 27. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nayan Builders and Developers (2014) 368 ITR 722 (Bom), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where the High Court admits the substantial question of law in respect of which penalty was levied, such penalty has to be deleted. 28. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Dhariwal Industries Ltd. vide ITA Nos.1133, 1136…

DCIT, CC-2(1), Pune vs. Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1307/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Central Circle 2(1), Vs. Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Dcit, Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Vs. Central Circle 2(1), Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Cit & Shri Arvind Desai, Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 23-01-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – CIT and Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245DSection 245D(4)Section 245HSection 271(1)(c)

…ted that treating the issue of residential status as a part and parcel of issue of concealment of income is not in accordance with law. 27. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nayan Builders and Developers (2014) 368 ITR 722 (Bom), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where the High Court admits the substantial question of law in respect of which penalty was levied, such penalty has to be deleted. 28. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Dhariwal Industries Ltd. vide ITA Nos.1133, 1136…

Pratap Nagnaji Rajgor, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 865/MUM/2025[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…rge for which the penalty proceeding was initiated. He thus, submitted that the penalty order so passed is bad in law. 4.2. The Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Nayan Builders and Developers reported in (2014) 368 ITR 722 wherein, Hon’ble Court held that, merely, because the quantum addition was confirmed and the question of law was admitted by Hon’ble High Court, penalty cannot be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4.3. The Ld. AR placed reliance on a Full Court Bench decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court at Goa in case of Mohd Farhan A. Shaikh V. DOT, Belgaum rep…

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals by the Revenue having common ground are dismissed

ITA 5606/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C, Kanojiya, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…ot be levied by charging the assessee with the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 5.2. For giving the above finding, we draw force from the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Nayan Builders & Developers 368 ITR 722 (Bom) who held that where the quantum appeal is pending before the Hon’ble High Court, penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not leviable. Similarly, before the coordinate bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of DCIT LTU v. Reliance Industries Ltd in ITA Nos. 6267-6269/Mum/2018 who after considering plethora of judicial precedents including that of Naya…

CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers

What is CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Nayan Builders and Developers

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

Shri Datta Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Shirol vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Kolhapur

T.L. Sritharan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-14, Chennai

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

M/S.Redington Distributors Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

M/S.Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

Nayankumar Jayantilal Balu, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

Poonam Gupta, Gwalior vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Gwalior

Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), Pune

DCIT, CC-2(1), Pune vs. Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav, Pune

Pratap Nagnaji Rajgor, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(3) (1), Mumbai

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai