CIT v. Parma Nand

268 ITR 172High Court2004#1411 most cited

What is CIT v. Parma Nand authority for?

Whether there was sufficient cause for delay in making applications for registration under section 12A and 80G is always a question of fact, and contumacious conduct by the assessee must be established for levying penalty under section 271C for non-deduction of TDS.

81

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Parma Nand · CIT v. Itochu Corporation · Section 271C · Section 194C · penalty deletion · contumacious conduct · mens rea for penalty · sufficient cause for delay · Section 12A registration · Section 80G approval · question of fact · Delhi High Court

Also reported as

135 Taxmann 100

Sections most often in play

Section 119Section 12ASection 80G(5)(iii)Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)Section 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iv)(B)Section 12AASection 194C

Issues it is cited on

compensatory interestsection 52(2)section 119(1)section 66section 10(46)section 10(20)section 271csection 273bsection 80g(5)(iii)section 194csection 201(1a)section 201(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Parma Nand

Shri Vishal Mohanlal Tilva, Baroda vs. The Addl.CIT, Central Range, Baroda

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1026/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarsr.

For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 68

…read with section 269SS of the Act. In support of her arguments, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied upon the following judgments: i) CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel, 183 taxman 53 (P&H) ii) CIT Vs. Saini Medical Store, 277 IR 420 (P&H) iii) CIT Vs. Parma Nand, 266 ITR 255 (Del) iv) Hemendra Chandulal Shah Vs. aCIT, ITA No.1129/Ahd/2010 order dated 6/9/2010 (ITAT-Ahd); v) Smt.Meera Devi Kumawat Vs. JCIT, ITA No.1201/JP/2019 order dated 21.10.2021 (ITAT-Jaipur); 8. On the other hand, the ld.Sr.DR, Smt.Leena Lal appearing for the Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities and relied upon judgments viz. (i…

Shri Mohanlal Savjibhai Tilva, Baroda vs. The Addl.CIT, Central Range, Baroda

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1025/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarsr.

For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 68

…read with section 269SS of the Act. In support of her arguments, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied upon the following judgments: i) CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel, 183 taxman 53 (P&H) ii) CIT Vs. Saini Medical Store, 277 IR 420 (P&H) iii) CIT Vs. Parma Nand, 266 ITR 255 (Del) iv) Hemendra Chandulal Shah Vs. aCIT, ITA No.1129/Ahd/2010 order dated 6/9/2010 (ITAT-Ahd); v) Smt.Meera Devi Kumawat Vs. JCIT, ITA No.1201/JP/2019 order dated 21.10.2021 (ITAT-Jaipur); 8. On the other hand, the ld.Sr.DR, Smt.Leena Lal appearing for the Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities and relied upon judgments viz. (i…

Shri Mohanlal Savjibhai Tilva, Baroda vs. The Addl.CIT, Central Range, Baroda

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1024/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarsr.

For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 68

…read with section 269SS of the Act. In support of her arguments, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied upon the following judgments: i) CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel, 183 taxman 53 (P&H) ii) CIT Vs. Saini Medical Store, 277 IR 420 (P&H) iii) CIT Vs. Parma Nand, 266 ITR 255 (Del) iv) Hemendra Chandulal Shah Vs. aCIT, ITA No.1129/Ahd/2010 order dated 6/9/2010 (ITAT-Ahd); v) Smt.Meera Devi Kumawat Vs. JCIT, ITA No.1201/JP/2019 order dated 21.10.2021 (ITAT-Jaipur); 8. On the other hand, the ld.Sr.DR, Smt.Leena Lal appearing for the Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities and relied upon judgments viz. (i…

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

…u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 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 ab…

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)

…h levy of penalty u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 matt…

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

…h levy of penalty u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 m…

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

…h levy of penalty u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 m…

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

…h levy of penalty u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 mat…

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

…u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 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…

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

…u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 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…

The ITO (TDS), Rajahmundry vs. M/S. Om Sai Ram, Enterprises, Mandapeta

In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 152/VIZ/2016[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.152/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Income Tax Officer (Tds) Vs. M/S Om Sai Ram Enterprises Tds Ward-1 Ravulapalem Rajahmundry [Pan : Aaao2649G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.70/Viz/2018 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.152/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S Om Sai Ram Enterprises Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds) Ravulapalem Tds Ward-1 Rajahmundry [Pan : Aaao2649G] रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 31.01.2019 20.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 194C(1)Section 201(1)Section 271C

…u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 cae 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.” 3. Being aggrieved, the Revenue to…

Electroplast Engineers, Mumbai vs. JCIT 24(3), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 4806/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S. Electroplast Engineers, Jcit-24(3) 4Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Garuda House, 142, Upper Govind Nagar, Vs. Mumbai Opp. Kailashpuri Hanuman Temple, Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Pan/Gir No. Aaafe 8028 N (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri D. G. Pansari Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2018 : 04.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D. G. Pansari
Section 269SSection 271DSection 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM M/s. Electroplast Engineers, JCIT-24(3) 4th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Garuda House, 142, Upper Govind Nagar, Vs. Mumbai Opp. Kailashpuri Hanuman Temple, Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 PAN/GIR No. AAAFE 8028 N (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri D. G. Pansari Date of Hearing : 19.11.2018 : 04.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-41, Mumbai (‘l…

M/S. Virgin Mobile India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT (TDS), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3431/DEL/2015[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishivirgin Mobile India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Jcit(Tds), C/O. Tata Teleservices Ltd, Range-51, Room No. 406, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, 2A, Old Ishwar Nagar, Mathura Road, New Delhi District Centre, Laxmi Pan: Aadcr5798J Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Ashita Farsanja, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 197(1)Section 201Section 246ASection 271CSection 274Section 275Section 40a

…h levy of penalty u/s 271-C for which it is necessary to establish 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 mat…

Mr. Lalit Modi, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5424/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi,CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 44A

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year 2012-13 Shri Lalit Modi JCIT, C/o Sekhri & Associates, Central Range-4, Flats No. 104-105, 28 Feroze New Delhi. Gandhi Road, Lajpat Nagar-III Vs. New Delhi – 110024. PAN AALPM7800R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri R.S. Singhvi,CA Shri Satyajeet Goel, CA Department by : Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20/06/2018 Date of 14/ 09/2018 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against impugned…

Addl. CIT (TDS), Ghaziabad vs. The Principal Officer, Noida

In the result all the appeals filed by the assessee in case of both the assessee for all the three AYs are allowed and appeal filed by the revenue for both the assessee for all the three AYs are di...

ITA 4840/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Garg, Adv
Section 133ASection 194ISection 201Section 271CSection 273B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4837 to 4839/Del/2015 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2013-14) Addl.CIT (TDS), Vs. The Principal Officer, CGO-1, Hapur Chungi M/s Jaypee Sport Ghaziabad. Sector-128, International ltd., Noida. PAN: AABCJ9037E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.4291 to 4293/Del/2015 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2013-14) M/s Jaypee Sport International Vs. DCIT (TDS), Noida. Ltd., Sector-128, Noida. PAN: AABCJ9037E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.4840 to 4842/Del/2015 Assessment Yea…

Addl. CIT (TDS), Ghaziabad vs. The Principal Officer, Noida

In the result all the appeals filed by the assessee in case of both the assessee for all the three AYs are allowed and appeal filed by the revenue for both the assessee for all the three AYs are di...

ITA 4837/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Garg, Adv
Section 133ASection 194ISection 201Section 271CSection 273B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4837 to 4839/Del/2015 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2013-14) Addl.CIT (TDS), Vs. The Principal Officer, CGO-1, Hapur Chungi M/s Jaypee Sport Ghaziabad. Sector-128, International ltd., Noida. PAN: AABCJ9037E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.4291 to 4293/Del/2015 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2013-14) M/s Jaypee Sport International Vs. DCIT (TDS), Noida. Ltd., Sector-128, Noida. PAN: AABCJ9037E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.4840 to 4842/Del/2015 Assessment Yea…

Japyee Sports International Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT (TDS), Noida

In the result all the appeals filed by the assessee in case of both the assessee for all the three AYs are allowed and appeal filed by the revenue for both the assessee for all the three AYs are di...

ITA 4291/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Garg, Adv
Section 133ASection 194ISection 201Section 271CSection 273B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4837 to 4839/Del/2015 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2013-14) Addl.CIT (TDS), Vs. The Principal Officer, CGO-1, Hapur Chungi M/s Jaypee Sport Ghaziabad. Sector-128, International ltd., Noida. PAN: AABCJ9037E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.4291 to 4293/Del/2015 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2013-14) M/s Jaypee Sport International Vs. DCIT (TDS), Noida. Ltd., Sector-128, Noida. PAN: AABCJ9037E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.4840 to 4842/Del/2015 Assessment Yea…

Th 130 M/S Bharathiyar Pwcs Ltd., Namakkal vs. ITO, Salem

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 255/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.255/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Th 130 M/S Bharathiyar Pwcs Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.86A, East Colony, Komarapalayam, V. Tds Ward, Namakkal Dt. – 638 183. Salem. Pan : Aaaab 7285 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. S. Sriniranjani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT
Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271Section 271C

…e deducted and paid `30,272/- on 29.08.2013. The balance amount of `18,476/- along with interest of `33,636/- was paid on 12.03.2014. These factual aspects are not in dispute. On identical circumstances, Delhi High Court in CIT v. Itochu Corporation (2004) 268 ITR 172 and in CIT v. Mitsui & Co. Ltd. And Another (2005) 272 ITR 545, deleted the penalty. The Apex Court, after reproducing the observation made by the Delhi Bench of this Tribunal, confirmed the order of the Delhi 4 I.T.A. No.255/Mds/17 High Court in Bank of Nova Scotia. In fact, the Apex Court observed as follows:- “2. The matter was pursued…

M/S.Mithra Agricultural Produce Company Ltd, Cochin vs. The Jt CIT(TDS), Cochin

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 212/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal & Shri George George K.

Section 115Section 194BSection 201Section 271BSection 271CSection 271C(1)Section 274

…y u/s 271C for which it is necessary to establish 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 271C 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.” So far the contention of the asses…