SOM NATH VIRMANI AND SONS HUF,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(1), GURGAON, HARYANA
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed
ITA 5081/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2025AY 2015-16
Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. Som Nath Virmani & Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sons Huf, Ward-5(1), Flat No. 303, Soverign 1, Gurgaon Vatika City, Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon-122001 Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanhs1927F Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somit Aggarwal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2025
For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)
…, seven years prior to the notice issued u/s 148. Hence, the penalty levied by the AO, u/s 271(1)(c) is not justified and is liable to be deleted. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions:- (1) CIT vs. Pushpendra Surana, (2014) 264 CTR 204 (Raj). (ii) CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Mittal, 241 ITR 124 (MP) (iii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd., 144 taxmann.com 165. M/s. Som Nath Virmani and Sons HUF 8. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative had relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee did not file the return of inco…