CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel

278 ITR 454High Court2005#1693 most cited
67

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel · Section 132(4) · retraction of statement · statement during search · evidentiary value of confession · Section 153A · Section 69A · Section 147 · statement recorded under section 132(4) · withdrawal of statement · search assessment

Also reported as

152 Taxmann 290200 CTR 300

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 132(4)Section 37(1)Section 133(6)Section 69ASection 153ASection 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

gaarsection 65(b)section 181section 194qsection 193section 65b(4)section 158bb(1)retraction of statementsection 158bbsection 65bstatement under section 132(4)section 65

Judgments citing CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Aryan Ispat & Power Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 3227/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Shri Sajjan Singh, Central Circle-17, F-180, C-Scheme, Room No. 103, First Floor, Subhash Nagar, Jaipur, Hall No. 1,Ara Centre, E-2, Pan:Apfps5687B Jhandewalan, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kr Tulisiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271A

…34/2017 dated 24.04.2017 in Pr. CIT-2, Vs. Mukesh Bhai Raman Lal Prajapati relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of in case of CIT Vs. Mahendershri Shah 299 ITR 305 and Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs. Shri Radhakrishan Goel 278 ITR 454. The ld CIT(A) has also deleted the penalty for the same reasons. NO contrary decision was put to our attention. Therefore, the decision of the CIT(A) is confirmed. The ld Assessing Officer is directed to delete penalty u/s 271AAA of Rs. 1731180/-. 12. In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 13. The cross objection filed by the assessee…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sajjan Singh, Jaipur

In the result appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 3226/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Shri Sajjan Singh, Central Circle-17, F-180, C-Scheme, Room No. 103, First Floor, Subhash Nagar, Jaipur, Hall No. 1,Ara Centre, E-2, Pan:Apfps5687B Jhandewalan, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kr Tulisiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271A

…34/2017 dated 24.04.2017 in Pr. CIT-2, Vs. Mukesh Bhai Raman Lal Prajapati relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of in case of CIT Vs. Mahendershri Shah 299 ITR 305 and Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs. Shri Radhakrishan Goel 278 ITR 454. The ld CIT(A) has also deleted the penalty for the same reasons. NO contrary decision was put to our attention. Therefore, the decision of the CIT(A) is confirmed. The ld Assessing Officer is directed to delete penalty u/s 271AAA of Rs. 1731180/-. 12. In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 13. The cross objection filed by the assessee…

Shri Mahesh Kumar Jain, Kishangarh vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Ajmer

In the result, we affirm the order of the ld CIT(A) in all these cases and all these cross appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 630/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2017AY 2014-15
Section 271A

…variation of levy of penalty @ 10% as against discharge from levy of penalty under section 271AAA(2) of the Act. In this regard, we refer to the various authorities on the subject. 23. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in case of Radha Kishan Goel reported in 278 ITR 454 in context of explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) has held as under: “10. Under section 132(4) of the Act, it is the authorised officer, who examines on oath any person, who is found to be in possession or control of any books of account, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, therefore, it is for the authorised o…

Sh. Shums Inayatali Soomar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, stay petition is dismissed as infructurous and the

ITA 2845/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…the assessee was not able to substantiate the manner in which such undisclosed income was earned. Basing on the decisions reported in CIT vs. Mahendra C. Shah in 299 ITR 305, Neerat Singal vs. Asstt. CIT 101 DTR 238 (Del. ‘E’), CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel in 278 ITR 454 and DCIT vs. Sulochanadevi 5 ITA No. 2845/Del/2017 & Stay No. 347/Del/2017 A. Agarwal in ITA No. 1052/Adh./2012, he argued that in the absence of any query about the manner in which the undisclosed income has been derived and about its substantiation, raised by the AO during the course of recording of statement u/s 132(4) of the Act, the AO is…

DCIT Cen Cir 20, Mumbai vs. Anupama P Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 925/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amarjit Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.925/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Asst. Cit, Central Circle-20, Smt. Anupama P. Jain Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, बिाम/ B-201, Minoo Minar, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 053 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Actpj 2249 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri T. A. Khan प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई की तायीख / : 10.07.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : 06.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order By The Ld. Cit(A) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2006-07, In The Matter Of Penalty Imposed U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri T. A. KhanFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…ompliance of Explanation -5 to section 271(1)(c). He in this regard referred to the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahendra C. Shah, 299 ITR 305 and the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Radha. Kishan Goel, 278 ITR 454(All). Thus immunity provided by Explanation -5 is available to the assessee even though assessee has not specified the manner in which the undisclosed income is earned by him. 6.3 In view of the above discussion we decline to interfere in the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed. 7. In the result, both the app…

M/S Fuel Corporation of India, Nagpur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is ordered to be allowed

ITA 33/NAG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133(4)Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 4

…be no occasion of an assessee to stage and make averments in the exact format stipulated by the provisions considering the setting in which such statement is being recorded, as noted by the Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Radha Kishan Goel (2005) 278 ITR 454. Secondly, considering the illiterate, to be specific and to the point regarding the conditions stipulated by exception no.2 while making statement u/s 132(4) of the Income tax Act, 1961. The view taken by the Tribunal as well as the Allahabad High Court to the effect that even if the statement does not specify the manner in which the income is d…

Sh. Rakesh Kumar Garg, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 673/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirakesh Kumar Garg, Vs. Dcit, G-15, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle-12, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aadpg0991M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271A

…coordinate benches in following cases: a. Pramod Kumar Jain Vs. DCIT 33 Taxmann.com 651 b. Ashok Kr. Sharma Vs. DCIT 33 TAxmann.com 652 c. Rajrani Gupta Vs. DCIT ITA No. 3371/Del/2011 d. Sunil Kr. Bansal Vs. DCIT 37 ITR (Trib) 576 e. CIT Vs. Radha Kishan Goel 278 ITR 454 f. Concrete Developers Vs. ACIt 34 Taxmann.com 62 g. ACIT Vs. Nandini Realtors ITA No. 415/Nagpur/2015 h. Brij Bhusan Singhal Vs. ITO 5261/Del/2013 i. DCIT Vs. Sulachana Devi Agarwal 1052/Ahd/2012 j. ACIT Vs. Kanakiya Spaces Pvt. Ltd. 6763/Mum/2011 k. Neeraj Singhal Vs. ACIT 146 ITD 152. l. ACIT V Ajit singh 76 Taxmmann.com 212 (jp) Page 4 of 4…

M/S Vee Gee Industrial Enterprises, Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5050/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr.DR
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…tement under section 132(4). The assessee was entitled to immunity under clause (2) to Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. 18. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel reported in 278 ITR 454, he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that much importance should not be attached to the statement about the manner in which income has been 9 derived which can be inferred on the facts and circumstances of the case. In the absence of anything to the contrary; all the conditions of Explanation 5(2) of section 27…

Murarilal Mittal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 773/JPR/2016[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 May 2017AY 2008-2009
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271A

…n this ground, immunity cannot be denied. He relied on the following decisions:- (i) Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT V Mahender C. Shah 299 ITR 305 (ii) Similar finding has been recorded by Hon’ble All. High Court in the case of CIT V Radha Kishan Goel 278 ITR 454. ITA 773/JP/2016_ 6 Murarilal Mittal Vs ACIT (iii) Gujarat High Court PR Commissioner of Income Tax-1 Versus M/s Geeta Prints Pvt. Ltd. Tax Appeal No. 565 of 2015 Dated: - 14 September 2015. He further relied on the following decisions: (i) ITAT Jaipur Bench in case of Late Smt Sudha Patni Vs ACIT ITA No 963/JP/2015 order dated 09/08/2016. (ii)…

ACIT Cen Cir 38, Mumbai vs. Mudra Lifestyle Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by revenue is dismissed

ITA 520/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Sh. Dharamesh Shah -ARFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 253Section 254(1)Section 271Section 271A

…Mahendra C. Shah 299 ITR 305 (Gujarat High Court), (iv) ACIT Vs Phoenix Mills Ltd in ITA No 6190 /M/2013 dated 7.8.2015. (v) Hemant Kumar Vs ACIT in ITA No.745 /M/2015 dated 19.07. 2016. (vi) Meerat Singal Vs ACIT [161 TT 483], (vii) CIT Vs Radha Kishan Goel [278 ITR 454]Allahabad High Court, (viii) Sunil Kumar Bansal Vs DCIT [37 ITR (Trib) 576], (ix) Pramod Kr Jain Vs DCIT [149 TTJ 36 (URO)] (x) DCIT Vs Neeraj Jindal [293 CTR 298] (xi) Sri KiranShah versus ACIT in ITANo.5919/M/2011,08.01.2014, (xii) DCIT versus Purti Shankar Karkhara [ 23 ITR (T) 667], (xiii) Sh. Dinesh Khanna versus DCIT, ITA No. 4200-4205/M/2…

M/S Naval K Agarwal, Nagpur vs. Asstt.Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 32/NAG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271A

…be no occasion of an assessee to stage and make averments in the exact format stipulated by the provisions considering the setting in which such statement is being recorded, as noted by the Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Radha Kishan Goel (2005) 278 ITR 454. Secondly, considering the illiterate, to be specific and to the point regarding the conditions 11 ITA No. 32/Nag/2013. stipulated by exception no.2 while making statement u/s 132(4) of the Income tax Act, 1961. The view taken by the Tribunal as well as the Allahabad High Court to the effect that even if the statement does not specify the manne…

Vishnu Prasad Maharwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 764/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Gulshan Aggarwal(CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl. CIT)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271A

…hich such income was earned also to substantiate the manner in which undisclosed income was derived. He submitted that the Coordinate Bench has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Radha Kishan Goel (2005) 278 ITR 454(All). The reliance is also placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Mahender C. Shah 299 ITR 305. 4.3 We have considered the rival contentions. There is no dispute with regard to the fact the assessee as per section 271AAA is required to admit the undisclosed income and specify the manner in whic…

Shri Sunil Raisoni, Nagpur vs. D.C.I.T. Centralcircle 2(3), Nagpur

In the result, these appeal filed by the assessees stand allowed

ITA 593/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya.

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271A

…reads as under : “Learned counsel of the assessee submitted that penalty u/s 271AAA should not be levied in this case. For this proposition he made reference to following case laws : “1. CIT vs. Mahendra C. Shah 299 ITR 305 (Guj.). 2. CIT vs. Radhakisan Goel 278 ITR 454 (All.). 3. Concrete Developers vs. ACIT 34 Taxmann.com 62 (Nagpur Trib.) 4. ACIT vs. V. Nandini Realtors Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 415/Nag/2015) Nagpur Trib.). 5. The above judgments of Hon’ble Gujarat and Allahabad High Courts have been followed by various Tribunals and held that if the assessee has declared income in 132(4) statement, showed in the re…

Shri Ravi Kataria, Ratlam vs. The DCIT Central Circle, Indore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand

ITA 898/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.898/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ravi Kataria Ratlam Pan – Acmpk 3917P` :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs Dcit Central Circle Indore :: ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.897/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Madanlal Kataria Ratlam Pan – Acfpk 5779D :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs Dcit Central Circle Indore :: ""यथ" /Respondent Shri P.D. Nagar "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By Shri Mohd. Javed

Section 132(4)Section 271A

…ITA Nos. 898 & 897/Ind/2016 Ravi Kataria & Madanlal Kataria आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE "ी डी.ट".गरा"सया, "या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.898/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ravi Kataria Ratlam PAN – ACMPK 3917P` :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs DCIT Central Circle Indore :: ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.897/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Madanlal Kataria Ratlam PAN – ACFPK 5779D :: अपीलाथ" /Appella…

Shri Madanlal Kataria, Ratlam vs. The DCIT Central Circle, Indore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand

ITA 897/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.898/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ravi Kataria Ratlam Pan – Acmpk 3917P` :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs Dcit Central Circle Indore :: ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.897/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Madanlal Kataria Ratlam Pan – Acfpk 5779D :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs Dcit Central Circle Indore :: ""यथ" /Respondent Shri P.D. Nagar "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By Shri Mohd. Javed

Section 132(4)Section 271A

…ITA Nos. 898 & 897/Ind/2016 Ravi Kataria & Madanlal Kataria आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE "ी डी.ट".गरा"सया, "या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.898/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ravi Kataria Ratlam PAN – ACMPK 3917P` :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs DCIT Central Circle Indore :: ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.897/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Madanlal Kataria Ratlam PAN – ACFPK 5779D :: अपीलाथ" /Appella…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 4(1), Mumbai vs. Centaur Mercantile P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 1701/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm Acit, Central Circle – 4 Vs. M/S. Centaur Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., Attrium 215, 10Th Floor, (1), Mumbai Andheri Kurla Road, Next To Courtyard Marioff Hotel Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400059 Pan/Gir No. Aaccc4199F Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By Shri B.D. Nike

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 271A

…to substantiate the manner in which such income was earned. The Ld. AR, in this regard also relied upon Hon'ble Gujrat High Court judgement in the case of CIT Vs. Mahendra C Shah (299 ITR 305) and Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Radha Kishan Goel (278 ITR 454) and also Hon'ble ITAT's decision in the case of M/s. Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Ltd. (ITA NO. 6763/Mum/2011), wherein Hon'ble ITAT had dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-40 deleting the penalty levied u,'s.271 AAA. In fact my Ld. Predecessor in case of Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Ltd. for, Y 2011-12 had deleted the penalty u/s. 271…

Chains Corner Jewellery (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 22, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5703/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year 2010-11

For Appellant: Mrs. Sanjukta Chowdhury, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Maurya Pratap, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2Section 271A

…he meaning of sub-section(2) of section 271AAA of the I.T. Act, 1961.” The Tribunal followed the judgement of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Mahendra C. Shah (299 ITR 305) and that of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel (2005) 278 ITR 454 (All.) and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. 6.4 Also a similar issue arose in Sita Ram Gupta vs. ACIT [2014] 48 taxmann.com 327 (Delhi - Trib.). The Tribunal held that “Where Assessing Officer having completed assessment, passed a penalty order under section 271AAA for default of not substantiating manner in which undisclosed income wa…

Narpat Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7662/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Shri Narpat Mehta, Vs. Acit – Cc-23, Mumbai 202, Sukh Jyot, Telpal Scheme No.1, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai - 400057 Pan/Gir No. Aaepm9981G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…ome Tax, Appeal - 40 erred in law & on facts in stating that the appellant's AR reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahendra C. Shah ( 299 ITR 305 ) & Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel (278 ITR 454) & Also Hon'ble ITAT decision in the case of Mls Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Ltd. ( ITA No. 6763/MUM/2011 ) is distinguishable from our case. 2 ITA No.7662-2014 Shri Narpat Mehta 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. 4. In this case, assessee is aggrieved for levy of penalty of Rs.1.00 lakh u/s.271AAA in respect of cash amount surrend…

Shivansh Realty P.Ltd, Uran vs. ITO 10(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5668/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5664/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Timble Reality Pvt Ltd., बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 10(3)(4), F No.2, Bldg, Gh 10, Dronagiri Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Housing Complex, Sector-30, M K Road, P O Bokadvira, Mumbai-400020 Tal.Uran-400702 (अपीऱधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

Section 132Section 153CSection 234BSection 69C

…aces it reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Koilashben Manharlal Chokshi reported in (2010) 3281TR 411 (Guj). In an another decision Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs Radha Kishan Goel reported in (2005) 270 ITR 454 observed that during the course of search and seizure action;' harassment had coercion do take place resulting putting an assessee under mental, torture; thereby the assessee loses his normal mental state of mind. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd Vs State of Kerala reported in (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) held that…

Shivansh Land Infrastructure P.Ltd, Uran vs. ITO 10(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5665/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5664/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Timble Reality Pvt Ltd., बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 10(3)(4), F No.2, Bldg, Gh 10, Dronagiri Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Housing Complex, Sector-30, M K Road, P O Bokadvira, Mumbai-400020 Tal.Uran-400702 (अपीऱधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

Section 132Section 153CSection 234BSection 69C

…aces it reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Koilashben Manharlal Chokshi reported in (2010) 3281TR 411 (Guj). In an another decision Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs Radha Kishan Goel reported in (2005) 270 ITR 454 observed that during the course of search and seizure action;' harassment had coercion do take place resulting putting an assessee under mental, torture; thereby the assessee loses his normal mental state of mind. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd Vs State of Kerala reported in (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) held that…