CIT v. Prithipal Singh & Co.

183 ITR 69High Court1990#17059 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

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

Judgments citing CIT v. Prithipal Singh & Co.

Jokhiram Durgadutt, Ranchi vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 400/RAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayjokhiram Durgadutt, D.C.I.T., 9, J.D. Corporate, Behind J.D. High Circle-1, Vs. Street, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 Ranchi. (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aabfj 2200 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

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

…sulted income is nil then the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is not leviable. Few instances are given as follows :- 1. B. L. Murarka v Commissioner of Income Tax ( 2001 ) 118 Taxman 421 (Raj - H. C. ) attached as Annexure no. 7, 2. CIT v Prithipal Singh & Co. ( 1990 ) 183 ITR 69 ( Punj. & Har. —H. C. ) attached as Annexure - 8. This judgement has been upheld by the Honourable Supreme Court. 3. CIT Vs. N. Krishnan (1999 ) 240 ITR 47 ( Ker - H. C. ) attached as Annexure - 9. 6. It has been held in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax - IV v Sambhav Media Ltd. ( 2013 ) 33 taxmann.com 97 (Guj - H.C. ) attached as Annexure -…

M/S 10-D Retails, Chandigarh vs. ITO, W-1(3), Chandigarh

ITA 1277/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri M.S.Vohra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 271

…the assessee still remained in negative i.e. net loss of Rs. 1,02,723/-. The Ld. counsel placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of ‘CIT vs Pritipal Singh’ dated 3.11.1988 reported in (1990) 183 ITR 69 (P&H), has submitted that as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court, loss cannot be termed as ‘income’. That the penalty provisions of section 271 (1)(c) of the ITA No. 1277-Chd-2018- M/s IOB Retails, Chandigarh 3 Act are attracted only in the case of an assessee having positive income and not in the case of loss, as the question of con…

M/S.Virtual Soft Systems Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…Act, 1961 on the ground that the total income of the assessee has been assessed at a minus figure/loss? http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 17 2. Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the judgments in Prithipal Singh’s case (183 ITR 69 and 249 ITR 670) will apply even after insertion of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1.4.1976? FACTS (C.A. NO. 7115 OF 2005) For the assessment year 1996-97, the assessee-appellant returned an income of Rs. 1,32,44,507.29 subject to depreciation. The depreciation claimed for the year was…

M/S.Virtual Soft Systems Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…Act, 1961 on the ground that the total income of the assessee has been assessed at a minus figure/loss? http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 17 2. Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the judgments in Prithipal Singh’s case (183 ITR 69 and 249 ITR 670) will apply even after insertion of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1.4.1976? FACTS (C.A. NO. 7115 OF 2005) For the assessment year 1996-97, the assessee-appellant returned an income of Rs. 1,32,44,507.29 subject to depreciation. The depreciation claimed for the year was…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Welcome Seeds Ltd

ITA/183/2001HC Delhi29 Jul 2005

…ting the penalty imposed under section 27l(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the total income of the assessee has been assessed at a minus figure/loss? Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the judgements in Prithipal Singh's case (183 ITR 69 and 249 ITR 670) will apply even after insertion of Explanation 4 to section 271 (l)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1.4.1976? Facts and Question 2: 2. To supply some factual content it would be sufficient for us to refer to the facts in the case of ITA 2051f|^. For the assessment year 1989-90 the assessee filed its return of inco…

CIT v. Prithipal Singh & Co. (183 ITR 69) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax