What is CIT v. ParmanandM.Patel authority for?

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment order under section 263 solely to initiate penalty proceedings if the Assessing Officer's view was sustainable in law. A mere disagreement with the Assessing Officer's opinion does not render the assessment erroneous and prejudicial.

How many judgments cite CIT v. ParmanandM.Patel?

32 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. ParmanandM.Patel (278 ITR 3), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. ParmanandM.Patel come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 263, Section 270A, Section 271(1)(a), Section 10B.

CIT v. ParmanandM.Patel (278 ITR 3)

DINESH VERMA,MANALI, HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ITO, ITO WARD KULLU

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 897/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vinamar Gupta, C.A (Virtually)For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 263Section 270A

…Jain (142 ITR 606, Delhi), CIT vs. Sudarshan Talkies (201 ITR 289, Delhi), CIT vs. Nihal Chand Rekyan (242 ITR 45, Delhi), CIT vs. KeshrimalParasmal (157 ITR 484, Rajasthan), CIT vs. Linotype & Machinery Ltd. (192 ITR 337, Calcutta), CIT vs. Parmanand Patel (278 ITR 3, Gujarat), and certain Tribunal decisions including Amarjeet Dhall, Easy Transcription & Software Pvt. Ltd., GM Builders and Air Wind Green Energy Ltd., to contend that revision cannot be exercised merely for initiation of penalty proceedings and therefore the impugned order deserves to be quashed. 7. Per contra, the learned Departmental Represent…

DUBBI GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD,DAUSA vs. ITO WD, DAUSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1283/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR (V.C.)

Section 139Section 144Section 148Section 263Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80P

…`आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1283/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 Dubbi Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti cuke The ITO, Ward- Dausa. Ltd. Vs. Sikrai, Dausa. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALD1199B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Anoop Bhatia, C.A. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Mrs. Alka…

HASMUKH HIRJI GADA,PUNE vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1023/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1023/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Hasmukh Hirji Gada, Vs. Pcit (Central), Pune. 1073, Bhosale Mystiqa, Plot No.425, Flat No.203, Gokhale Road, Om Super Market, Shivaji Nagar, Pune- 411002. Pan : Adxps3533L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Neelesh Khandelwal Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Date Of Hearing : 02.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Pcit (Central), Pune For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions Of Law It Be Held That The Order Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Under Section 263 For Initiating The Penalty Under Section 271Aac Of The Act Is Without Jurisdiction & Hence Is Improper, Unwarranted, Unjustified & Contrary To The Provisions Of Law & Facts Prevailing In The Case. The Order Passed U/S. 263 Be Set Aside. The Appellant Be Granted Just & Proper Relief In This Respect.

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel

Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 263Section 271ASection 69A

…of the Act. We find similar issue has come up in the case of Dharmanandan Diamonds Pvt. Ltd v ACIT in ITA No. 1624/Mum/2014 dated 23.03.2017 and the Coordinate Bench following decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v Paramanand M Patel [278 ITR 3) and the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Subhash Kumar Jain [335 ITR 364] set aside the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax passed u/s 263 of the Act in directing the Assessing Officer to initiate penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act observing as under:- "4. We have heard the rival submissions, perus…

AMRUTA FABRICS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1111/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1110, 1111 & 1112/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18) बनाम/ Amruta Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. The Pr. Cit 199, New Cloth Market, Ahmedabad-1 Vs. Opp. Raipur Darwaja, Sarangpur, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaica0877A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Ms. Astha Maniar, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit. Dr 18/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 21/10/2024

For Appellant: Ms. Astha Maniar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…ree, it does not make the order of the AO erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, as the view taken by the AO was sustainable in law. She also relied upon the judgement of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Parmanand M. Patel, 278 ITR 3 (Guj.) and the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of Easy Transcription and Software Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2017) 88 taxmann.com 772 (Ahd.-Trib.) in support of her contention that the Commissioner was not empowered to record satisfaction for initiating penalty proceeding and that he cannot do it by directing the Assessing Authority…

AMRUTA FABRICS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1110/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1110, 1111 & 1112/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18) बनाम/ Amruta Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. The Pr. Cit 199, New Cloth Market, Ahmedabad-1 Vs. Opp. Raipur Darwaja, Sarangpur, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaica0877A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Ms. Astha Maniar, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit. Dr 18/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 21/10/2024

For Appellant: Ms. Astha Maniar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…ree, it does not make the order of the AO erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, as the view taken by the AO was sustainable in law. She also relied upon the judgement of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Parmanand M. Patel, 278 ITR 3 (Guj.) and the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of Easy Transcription and Software Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2017) 88 taxmann.com 772 (Ahd.-Trib.) in support of her contention that the Commissioner was not empowered to record satisfaction for initiating penalty proceeding and that he cannot do it by directing the Assessing Authority…