CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals

335 ITR 259High Court2011#668 most cited

What is CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals authority for?

No penalty under section 271(1)(c) can be imposed if the amount of tax sought to be evaded is nil under Explanation 4(c), such as when the assessment results in a refund even after an addition to income. The conditions stipulated in the explanations to section 271(1)(c) must be unambiguously met for penalty imposition.

149

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,406 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals · section 271(1)(c) · Explanation 4(c) · penalty for concealment · furnishing inaccurate particulars · tax sought to be evaded · nil tax liability · assessment refund · survey action

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 115BBESection 69Section 69A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

surrender of incomepenalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularsconcealment of incomepenalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 274section 271(1)section 133alevy of penaltysection 271section 133

Judgments citing CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals

Anand Methuku, Vikrarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikrarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 540/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

Anand Methuku, Vikrarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikrarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 538/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

Anand Methuku, Vikrarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikrarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 537/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

Sabitha Repalle, Vikrarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikrarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 536/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

Sabitha Repalle, Vikarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikrarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 535/HYD/2021[2016-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2016-16

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

Sabitha Repalle, Vikarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Vikrarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 534/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

Sabitha Anand Hospital, Vikarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 532/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

Anand Methuku, Vikrarabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikrarabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 539/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Sabitha Anand Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hospital, Ward-1, Vikarabad. Vikarabad. Pan No.Abwfs9362E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri VYST Sai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancies found in the course of survey. And therefore, the offer made by the assessee including the partners cannot be said that it is not on voluntary basis. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Delhi) for the proposition that when assessee discloses particulars of income and surrender in return consequent to survey proceedings, penalty cannot be imposed. 16. Heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on before me. On perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order in…

ACIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Charchit Agarwal, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7618/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Acit Vs. Charchit Agarwal Central Circle – 28 1245, Kucha Mahajani, New Delhi Chandni Chowk New Delhi - 110006 Pan No. Adspa 0329 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajiv Saxena, Advocate Revenue By Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 22.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.11.2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.09.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 29, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

Section 133ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ded in the return of income and taxes paid thereon, there cannot be any concealment of income or nor non- disclosure of income on the part of the assessee. He submitted that CIT(A) has rightly, following the decision in the case of CIT vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals 355 ITR 259 (Delhi), deleted the addition. He thus supported the order of CIT(A). 6. Learned DR on the other hand supported the order of lower authorities. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the deletion of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is a…

ITO-1, Itarsi vs. Shri Anil Kumar Soni, Itarsi

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITANo

ITA 334/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Years: 2011-12 Ito-1

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

…uring the assessment, the question of assesse having furnished inaccurate particulars of the income and imposing penalty thereon would not arise.” 10. Similar view was also taken by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals (2011)335 ITR 259 (Del) wherein Hon’ble High Court held as follows: 12. After considering the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the argument of the learned counsel for the assessee has to prevail as it carried substantial weight. It is to be kept in mind that Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is a penal provision a…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. Shri Vasudev D. Goplani, Surat

In the result the ground of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 154/SRT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Dcit, Central Circle-3, Shri Vasudev D Goplani, Room No. 507, 5Th Floor, 3-B, Chandan Park Society, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Near Adajan Road, Majura Gate, Surat. Surat-395001. Pan : Abhpg3609B Revenue / Appellant Assessee /Respondent

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…53A and not on the additions/deviations made in the assessment order, with respect to which satisfaction has been recorded separately and penalty was initiated. The ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in S.A.S. Pharmaceutical ( 335 ITR 259 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Krit Dahyabhai Patel vs. ACIT (280 CTR 216), wherein it was held that penalty is not imposable, if the income has been declared in the return of income in response to the notice under section 153A. The ld. CIT(A) after referring the decision of Tribunal in ITO Vs Goplani & Ruchandani (supra) and decision of Ahmed…

ACIT Circle-3, Kalyan vs. Varna Graphics, Thane

In the result, appeals of the revenue aredismissed

ITA 6744/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Yadav
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…ase, since the assessed income and the returned income are the same the machinery provision for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) fails. In this regard we draw support from the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SAS Pharmaceutical [2011]] 335 ITR 259 (Del.). The Hon'ble High Court has expounded that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) can only be levied if in the course of proceedings, the A.O. is satisfied that 6 ITA.NOs. 6743, 6744 & 6745/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/s. Varna Graphics there is an concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The words 'in the course of any proceedin…

ACIT Circle-3, Kalyan vs. Varma Graphics, Thane

In the result, appeals of the revenue aredismissed

ITA 6743/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Yadav
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…ase, since the assessed income and the returned income are the same the machinery provision for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) fails. In this regard we draw support from the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SAS Pharmaceutical [2011]] 335 ITR 259 (Del.). The Hon'ble High Court has expounded that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) can only be levied if in the course of proceedings, the A.O. is satisfied that 6 ITA.NOs. 6743, 6744 & 6745/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/s. Varna Graphics there is an concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The words 'in the course of any proceedin…

Shri Francis Thomas, Mumbai vs. JCIT (OSD) CC- 2(3), Mumbai

ITA 1732/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1732/Mum/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Francis Thomas Jcit (Osd)-Cc-2(3) बनाम/ 803, 8Th Floor, Old Cgo Building 29-C, D-1, Aravali Apartments, Sec-52 Noida, Up-203 303 Pratishtha Bhawan, M.K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Pan No.: Adgpt-3709-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2000/Mum/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit -Cc-2(3) Shri Francis Thomas 803, 8Th Floor, Old Cgo Building बनाम/ 29-C, D-1, Aravali Apartments Pratishtha Bhawan, M.K. Road Sec-52 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Noida, Up-203 303 Pan No.: Adgpt-3709-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Ms. Usha Gaikwad - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 06/05/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 17/06/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 131Section 132ASection 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…rate particulars of income should be in the return of income filed by the assessee. Since returned income filed by the assessee was accepted by Ld. AO, no penalty would be leviable as per the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s SAS Pharmaceutical (335 ITR 259). The Ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that the disclosure was made by the assessee only because cash was seized by the department. Had there been no seizure by the department, the amount would not have been declared in the return of income. 6 Shri Francis Thomas Assessment Year: 2013-14 Our findings and Adjudication 7. We have carefully con…

Sai Samarth Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 1, Thane

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

ITA 3718/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3718/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3720/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3721/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ M/S. Sai Samarth Enterprises Dcit-Central Circle-1, 107, Patel Building, Parel, Thane. Vs. Mumbai. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abufs9008B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Suchek Anchaliya Revenue By: Shri T. S. Khalsa (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/03/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/05/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, (Jm): The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 29.03.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 11, Pune [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Ordered To Be Confirmed.

For Appellant: Shri Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Shri T. S. Khalsa (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 132oSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3718/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3720/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3721/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ M/s. Sai Samarth Enterprises DCIT-Central Circle-1, 107, Patel Building, Parel, Thane. Vs. Mumbai. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ABUFS9008B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Suchek Anchaliya Revenue by: Shri T…

Balee Plastics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7663/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2021AY 2009-10
Section 133ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69B

…of Rs 3 crores was also duly offered to tax by the assessee in the return of income filed. Moreover, we find that similar issue had been the subject matter of adjudication by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported in 335 ITR 259 (Del) wherein it was held that for the purpose of imposing penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee has to be in the income tax return filed by the assessee. The facts before the Delhi High Court was that certain income was surrendered by the assessee…

Shri Mohamed Mohtram Farooqui, Jhunjhunu vs. ACIT, Circle, Jhunjhunu

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

ITA 1252/JPR/2019[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Dec 2020AY 1993-94
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 132(12)Section 132(4)Section 132(5)Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…he return and therefore, no penalty is leviable u/s 271(1)(c). Therefore, the penalty imposed by AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) is not justified and against the law. In support, reliance was placed on the following cases:- • CIT Vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals (2011) 335 ITR 259 (Del.) • PCIT Vs. Shree Sai Developers (2019) 418 ITR 306 (Guj.) • Sh. Rajendra Shringi Vs. DCIT (2020) 77 ITR (Trib) 0085 (Jaipur) 7 Sh. Mohamed Mohtram Farooqui vs. ACIT, Jhunjhunu • Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO 141 ITD 590 (2013) (Bang.) • DCIT Vs. Dr. Satish B. Gupta (2011) 49 DTR 262 (Ahd.) • CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (…

Shri Niral Krupesh Patel, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(3), Baroda

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

ITA 563/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 273A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. Asstt. Name of ITA No. Name of Appellant No. Year Respondent Shri Niral Krupesh Patel, Surendra Farm, 563/Ahd/2016 Mahapura road, D.C.I.T, 1. 2009-2010 Baroda-390023 Circle-1(3), Baroda. PAN No.ACQPP6163R 1061/Ahd/2016 D.C.I.T, 2011-12 & 2-3 & -do- Circle-1(3), 2010-11 1853/Ahd/2017 Baroda. Shri Tanmay Surendrabhai Patel, 601- 2009-10, D.C.I.T, 15, Parishram Society, 4-6 602/Ahd/2016…

Shri Rajendra Shringi, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1087/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…endra Shringi, Jaipur. said surrender/declaration of income in the return of income as concealment of particulars of income. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. S.A.S. Pharmaceuticals, 335 ITR 259 (Del.) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that when the assessee has declared the income including the amount surrendered by it during the course of survey, then the assessment framed including the surrendered amount without making any addition would not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of…

Dattaraj Madhukar Wafgaonkar, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 525/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Shabana Parveen
Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 271(1)(c)

…therefore, no penalty under the provisions of section 271(1)(c) could be levied. In support of his submissions the ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals reported as 335 ITR 259 and the decision of Hyderabad Bench of Tribunal in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sri Lakshmi Gayatri Hotels Pvt. Ltd. reported as 36 CCH 522. 3. On the other hand Mrs. Shabana Parveen representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee. 4. We have heard the su…