CIT v. Santosh Financiers

247 ITR 742High Court2001#23940 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Judgments citing CIT v. Santosh Financiers

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Honda Trading Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of the assessee is treated as infructuous owing to the adjudication on merits of the case

ITA 747/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 747/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Dcit, Vs M/S Honda Trading Corporation Circle-11(1), India Pvt. Ltd., Sigma Centre, A- New Delhi 27, Infocity, Sector-34, Gurgaon-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabch5556J

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Kedia, CIT DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…g judicial decisions: " K.C Builders Vs ACIT (265ITR 562) (SC) " CIT Vs Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Ltd. (1995) 211 ITR 35 (Orissa HC) " Hindustan Steel Ltd Vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) " Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Santhosh Financiers (2001) 247 ITR 742 (Kerala) 7. In connection with the penalty levied, we have perused the observation of the ITAT with regard to the foreign exchange fluctuation, which is as under: “21. From the above submissions and careful perusal of citations and all other relevant judgments we observe that Rule 10B(1)(e) of the Act on the one side and other sub-rules in the c…

M/S Alp Overseas Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6140/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

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

…d the same due to misconception of law, since there was no concealment of the fact of receipt, but only a claim that it was not taxable, though such claim was misconceived, penalty is not leviable. 5 [Type the document title] CIT v Santosh Financiers (2001) 247 ITR 742 (Ker) following the rationale of the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT (Addl) v Jeevan Lal Sah (1994) 205 ITR 244 (SC) and Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. v C/T(1987) 168 ITR 705 (SC). CIT v Seeds India Ltd. (P.H.I) (2008) 301 ITR 13 (Del). Where there was a solitary mistake in debiting cost of wires to consumable stores account and th…

M/S. Dhansar Engineering (P) Ltd., Dhanbad vs. ACIT, C.C. - VII, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 921/KOL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kumar, ACA, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Bhattacharya, JCIT, Ld.DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 274

…3. Lotus learning (P) Ltd –Vs- DCIT (2006) 7 SOT 540(Mum) 4. CIT –Vs- Punjab Tyre 162 ITR 571 5. CIT –Vs- Shiv Oil and Dal Mill (2006) 281 ITR 221(All) 6. Navbharat Enterprises (P) Ltd –Vs- Asstt.CIT (2009) 118 ITD 8(Hyd) 7. CIT –Vs- Santosh Financier (2001) 247 ITR 742 (Kar) 8. Addl.CIT –Vs- Jeevan Lal Sah (1994) 205 ITR 244(SC) 9. CIT –Vs- S. Dhanabai (2009) 178 Taxman 242 (Delhi) ITA Nos. 921 & 922/Kol/2011-C-JM 6 M/s. Dhansar Engg.P.Ltd I have gone through the gist of the decisions. Most of the cases are factually different from the instant case. The decisions are in respect of provision existing prior to…

CIT v. Santosh Financiers (247 ITR 742) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax