CIT v. Prasanna Dugar

371 ITR 19High Court2015#1822 most cited
63

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Prasanna Dugar · penalty under section 271(1)(c) · section 274 notice · concealment of income · inaccurate particulars · search assessment · section 132 · SLP dismissal

Also reported as

59 Taxmann.com 99279 CTR 86

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 148Section 153ASection 274Section 147Section 132Section 276C

Issues it is cited on

section 276csection 276section 40a(ia)section 142(2a)penalty under section 271(1)(c)section 271aabfurnishing inaccurate particularsstatement under section 132(4)penalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 274concealment of incomesection 270

Judgments citing CIT v. Prasanna Dugar

M/S Kakade Construction Company, Pune vs. ACIT, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 100/PUN/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…

Anant Mate, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 1674/PUN/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1674 To 1678/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2008-09 & 2010-11

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 132Section 139Section 139(5)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…ssee in written submissions is covered against the assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prasanna Dugar Vs. CIT (2016) 70 taxmann.com 175 (SC), which has upheld the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT Vs. Prasanna Dugar (2015) 371 ITR 19 (Cal.). 9. The second issue which was raised before us was the jurisdictional issue by way of ground of appeal No.1, for which the assessee has not filed any written submissions, is, that the Assessing Officer had failed to record satisfaction on one of the limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act while initiating penalty for concealment. Further, t…

Radha Govind Lashkari, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, it cannot be said to be case of concealment of income and the penalty to this extent stand deleted

ITA 141/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S. R. Sharma (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri O.P. Bhateja (Addl.CIT)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR lqJh fnok flag] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.141/JP/16 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11 cuke Sh.Radha Govind Lashkari, The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Vs. 16, Shubham Enclave, Jamnalal Jaipur Bajaj Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAHPL2851M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrhdh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri S. R. Sharma (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by : Shri…