How many judgments cite CIT v. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd.?

116 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd. (303 ITR 53), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 271(1)(c), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 250, Section 274.

CIT v. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd.

303 ITR 53High Court2008#913 most cited

What is CIT v. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd. authority for?

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act is not leviable when an addition to income is made purely on an estimated basis, without any concrete evidence of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

116

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd. · Section 271(1)(c) penalty · estimated addition · no penalty on estimate basis · concealment of income · inaccurate particulars · deletion of penalty · 271(1)(c) without concrete evidence · levy of penalty

Also reported as

171 Taxmann 320

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 250 Section 274 Section 133(6)Section 69A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 271(l)section 271(l)(c)penalty under section 271(1)(c)deletion of penalty furnishing inaccurate particulars of income concealment of income furnishing inaccurate particulars penalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 271(1)levy of penalty section 274 section 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing CIT v. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd.

M/S. A.C. Goods Transport Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2428/DEL/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2004-05

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

…t justified in making an addition without appreciating the fact whether or not there is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof. 7. Assessee placed reliance on the decisions reported in CIT vs. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd (2008) 303 ITR 53 (Punjab and Haryana); CIT verses Kailash crockery house (1999) 235 ITR 554 (Patna); CIT verses metal products of India (1984) 150 ITR 714 (Punjab and Haryana); CIT vs. Whitelene chemicals (2014) 360 ITR 385 (Guj); CIT verses Raj Bans Singh (2005) 276 ITR 351 (Allahabad); CIT verses Aero traders (2010) 322 ITR 316 (Delhi); CIT verses Modi industria…

Ms. Tripta Kaur, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2974/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2012-13 Tripta Kaur, Acit, Central Circle- 14, A-29, Friends Colony-East, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA

Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…ing of inaccurate particulars of such income by the assessee. Therefore, penalty u/s 6 271(1)(c) cannot be levied on account of estimated addition to the closing stock. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & reported in 303 ITR 53, in the case of Harigopal Singh vs. CIT reported in 258 ITR 85 and various other decisions. 8. In another plank of argument, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that while passing the assessment order the Assessing Officer has not stated the limb under which the penalty proceedings are being initiated. He has simply mentioned penalty procee…

Sh. Anil Talwar, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 357/CHANDI/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ved JainFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…is to the estimate of the DVO. In the said background it was his submission that penalty cannot be levied on the basis of additions made on an estimate basis. Reliance was placed upon Sangrur Vanaspati mills Ltd. [2008] 171 taxman320 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2008] 303 ITR 53 (Punjab & Haryana) ; CIT v. Aero traders (p.) Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 31 6 (Delhi); Harigopal Singh vs. CIT[2002] 125taxman242 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2002] 258 ITR 85 (Punjab & Haryana); CIT v. Dhillon Rice Mills [2003]127taxman529 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2002] 256 ITR 447 (Punjab & Haryana); Ajay Gupta v. DCIT ITA 357 to 361/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2005-06 to 2009-1…

Hans Ispat Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3852/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 3849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Prakash D. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Senapati, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 144Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…enditure has been disallowed on estimate basis, there cannot be any penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgment of the Honble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sangrur Vanspati Mills Limited (303 ITR 53)(2008). (vi) The Ld. A.O. has not properly considered our written submission dated 18th November 2013. That further, proper opportunity of hearing has not been given for the levy of the penalty; though the same has been specifically asked vide the said letter. And therefore the ITA Nos. 3849 to 3852/Del/2015 5 Hans Ispat Ltd. order passed by the…

Hans Ispat Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3851/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 3849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Prakash D. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Senapati, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 144Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)

Hans Ispat Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3850/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 3849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Prakash D. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Senapati, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 144Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)

Hans Ispat Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3849/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 3849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Prakash D. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Senapati, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 144Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)

Tribhovandas Bhimji Zaveri (Delhi ) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 9, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 24/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm M/S. Tribhovandas Bhimji Zaveri Vs. Dcit Cen Cir 9 (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd., R.No.806, Old Cgo Annex Ground Floor Building, M.K.Road, Somnath Apartments, Ram Mumbai – 400 020 Mandir R.D.Vile Parle (E) Mumbai – 400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aabct0165H Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 171(1)(c)Section 271(1)(c)

…(1)(c) are not attracted to the case where the income of an assessee is assessed on estimation basis and additions have been made therein. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- a. C.IT.Vs. Sangrur Vanaspati Mill Ltd. 303 ITR 53 (P & H) b. C.IT. Vs. RavaitSingh&Co. 254ITR191(P&H) c. CIT Vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading & Rubber lnd.[2014] 360 ITR 580 (Raj.) d. DCIT Vs. Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg. Ltd. [2012J52 SOT 91 (Delhi) e. Sunil Kumar Singhania Vs. ACIT [2012] 52 SOT 137 (Hyderabad) 5. On the other hand, it was contended by learned DR that the Tribunal itself has observed in…

ACIT 15(3), Mumbai vs. Tirupati Corporation, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3066/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

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

…t 8%, thus, penalty imposed on the basis of addition made by AO on estimated basis was deleted by CIT(A). In view of the following judicial pronouncements, no penalty is leviable on the addition made on estimated basis. a. C.IT.Vs. Sangrur Vanaspati Mill Ltd. 303 ITR 53 (P & H) b. C.IT. Vs. RavaitSingh&Co. 254ITR191(P&H) c. CIT Vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading & Rubber lnd.[2014] 360 ITR 580 (Raj.) d. DCIT Vs. Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg. Ltd. [2012J52 SOT 91 (Delhi) e. Sunil Kumar Singhania Vs. ACIT [2012] 52 SOT 137 (Hyderabad) 8. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CI…

ACIT, Muzaffarnagar vs. M/S the Ganga Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6174/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2009-10

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

…upreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sangrrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd., Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP of revenue in the case of CIT vs. Sangrrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd., and had upheld the decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court reported in (2008) 303 ITR 53 (P & H) wherein it has been held that in the case of addition based on estimate, penalty was not leviable. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT (A) the revenue is in appeal before us now. 5. Ld. DR placed his reliance upon the decision of Ld. AO. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee before us today. 6. We have perused the submissions advanc…

Pradeep Kumar Prusty, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 44/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S Saini

For Appellant: Shri B.R.Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

…1(1)(c) of the Act and levied penalty of Rs.1,42,390/-. 13. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty for concealment of income. 14. Before me, ld A.R. relied on the decision of Hon’ble P&H High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sangrur Vansspati Mills Ltd., 303 ITR 53 (P&H) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that provisions of section 271(1)(c) are not attracted to cases where the income of an assessee is assessed on estimate basis and additions are made therein. It was held that when the addition had been made on the basis of estimate and not on account of any concrete evidence of concealment,…

Ashok Kumar Patra, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 41/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S Saini

For Appellant: Shri B.R.Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

….271(1)(c) of the Act and levied penalty of Rs.2,09,410/- 13. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 14. Before me, ld A.R. relied on the decision of Hon’ble P&H High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd., 303 ITR 53 (P&H) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that provisions of section 271(1)(c) are not attracted to cases where the income of an assessee is assessed on estimate basis and additions are made therein. It was held that when the addition had been made on the basis of estimate and not on account of any concrete evidence of concealment,…

ACIT, Cir-40, Kolkata vs. M/S Deepak Construction Co., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 179/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

…t the penalty cannot be imposed on income based on estimation, the Ld. AR referred to the para-5 of impugned order and in this regard, we may examine the decision in the case of Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana reported in 303 ITR 53 (P&H). The facts therein, the addition had been made by the AO by estimating the sales outside the books of account. The CIT(A) estimated the yield and worked out the additional production, on this estimated additional production and applied average sale rate and worked out the additional sale at Rs. 15,50,306 which was rounded off to Rs. 15,50,00…

Sri Harjit Singh Sall, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-50(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 576/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…t Rs.10,00,000/- on estimation and penalty cannot be imposed on the basis of estimation and relied on the decisions in the cases of Hari Gopal reported in 258 ITR 85 (P&H), Ravail Singh reported in 254 ITR 191 (P&H) and Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd reported in 303 ITR 53 (P&H) for such proposition and placed on record at page 64 of the paper book. 9. On the contrary, the Ld.DR submits that the assessee could not produce any explanation either in assessment proceedings or penalty proceedings before the AO and relied on the orders of the authorities below. 10. Heard both and perused the material available on recor…

Sonali A. Shah, Mumbai vs. I.T.O 14(3) (3), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5720/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2007-08 Mrs. Sonali A. Shah, I.T.O. – 14(3), Raj Parashar, Earnest House, 3Rd Floor, Nariman Point, Flat No.301-2-3, Vs. Mumbai – 21 95/F, Indranarayan Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai – 400 054 Pan: Agdps 6844D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Aditya R. Ajgaonkar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rajneesh K. Arvind, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2016 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Aditya R. Ajgaonkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajneesh K. Arvind, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 144Section 145Section 271(1)(c)

…orrect income was estimated by applying a flat rate. On these facts the Tribunal held that it could not be said that the assessee was guilty of fraud or gross or willful neglect.” 9 Mrs. Sonali A. Shah 13. In the case of CIT vs. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd. (303 ITR 53) the facts are during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer came to know that the Central Enforcement Wing of the Excise & Taxation Department carried out inspection of the business premises of the assessee on 23-1-1993 and seized certain documents. On scrutiny of those documents, the Assessing Officer noticed that in one invoice book…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ghodawat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, appeal the filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1613/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raodeputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(2) Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S.Ghodawat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Embassy Point, 150, Infantry Road, Bangalore. … Respondent Aaccm6628B

For Appellant: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT(DR)For Respondent: None

Section 271(1)(c)

…appellate authorities. While matter stood there, the AO proceeded with levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.36,61690/-. 4. On appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) deleted the penalty relying on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd.(303 ITR 53) wherein it was held that addition made on the basis of an estimate and not on the basis of any concrete piece of evidence, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be restored. The CIT(A) also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N Shroff vs. JCIT (291 ITR 519) where addition was made not accepting the opinion of…