CIT v. Shadiram Balmukand

94 ITR 154High Court1974#6549 most cited
18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing CIT v. Shadiram Balmukand

SHRI KHATU SHYAM BUILDERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 486/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…atrika Pvt. Ltd. [1979] 1 Taxman 445 (Cal.)[CLC –67-72], following the above mentioned judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court, held that “….The Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakhdhir Lalji [1972] 85 ITR 77 have held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction thereafter to proceed on the basis of the findings of the appellate authorit…

TRIUNE ENERGY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 7553/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ani Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmatriune Energy Pvt Ltd, Vs. Dcit, B-1/H-4, Mohan Circle-25(2), Cooperative Indl. Estate, New Delhi Mathura Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs1045E

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon‟ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction thereafter to proceed on the basis of the findings of the appe…

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TEXATION), NOIDA

ITA 4747/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4741/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2011-12 Ita No. 4742/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2012-13 Ita No. 4743/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2013-14 Ita No. 4744/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2014-15

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty ITA No. 4741 to 4747/Del/2019 Sharda Educational Trust 4 proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction t…

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TEXATION), NOIDA

ITA 4746/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4741/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2011-12 Ita No. 4742/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2012-13 Ita No. 4743/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2013-14 Ita No. 4744/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2014-15

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty ITA No. 4741 to 4747/Del/2019 Sharda Educational Trust 4 proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction t…

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TEXATION), NOIDA

ITA 4745/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4741/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2011-12 Ita No. 4742/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2012-13 Ita No. 4743/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2013-14 Ita No. 4744/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2014-15

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty ITA No. 4741 to 4747/Del/2019 Sharda Educational Trust 4 proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction t…

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TEXATION), NOIDA

ITA 4744/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4741/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2011-12 Ita No. 4742/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2012-13 Ita No. 4743/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2013-14 Ita No. 4744/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2014-15

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty ITA No. 4741 to 4747/Del/2019 Sharda Educational Trust 4 proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction t…

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TEXATION), NOIDA

ITA 4743/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4741/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2011-12 Ita No. 4742/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2012-13 Ita No. 4743/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2013-14 Ita No. 4744/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2014-15

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty ITA No. 4741 to 4747/Del/2019 Sharda Educational Trust 4 proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction t…

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TEXATION), NOIDA

ITA 4742/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4741/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2011-12 Ita No. 4742/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2012-13 Ita No. 4743/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2013-14 Ita No. 4744/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2014-15

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty ITA No. 4741 to 4747/Del/2019 Sharda Educational Trust 4 proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction t…

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TEXATION), NOIDA

ITA 4741/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4741/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2011-12 Ita No. 4742/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2012-13 Ita No. 4743/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2013-14 Ita No. 4744/Del./2019, A. Y. : 2014-15

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty ITA No. 4741 to 4747/Del/2019 Sharda Educational Trust 4 proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction t…

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4641/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Ghaziabad Development Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Authority Tax, Exemption Circle Vikas Path, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan No. Aaalg0072C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction thereafter to proceed on the basis of the findings of the appe…

TANYA AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-25(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 3370/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R.Kumar & Sh.Anubhav Sharmatanya Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit, 312, Thapar Chamber, Ring Circle 25(1), Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaact3639B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction thereafter to proceed on the basis of the findings Tanya Auto…

LATE SMT. HARMINDER KAUR L/H SH. APS MATHAROO,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 36(4), NEW DELHI

ITA 301/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.301 /Del/2019 (Assessment Year : 2011-12)

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 54Section 54F

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction thereafter to proceed on the basis of the findings of the appe…

GAUTAM KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 12, NEW DELHI

ITA 3907/DEL/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.3906 /Del/2018 (Assessment Year : 2003-04) Gautam Kumar Vs. Acit B-101/102 Cosmopolitan Central Circle-12 Society New Delhi 110002 Plot No. 33, Sec 10 Dwarka, New Delhi 110075 Pan : Aigpk0403M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction thereafter to proceed on the basis of the findings of the appe…

GAUTAM KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 12, NEW DELHI

ITA 3906/DEL/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.3906 /Del/2018 (Assessment Year : 2003-04) Gautam Kumar Vs. Acit B-101/102 Cosmopolitan Central Circle-12 Society New Delhi 110002 Plot No. 33, Sec 10 Dwarka, New Delhi 110075 Pan : Aigpk0403M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…proceedings was altered by the Ld.CIT(A), in a significant way, the very basis of initiation of penalty proceedings was nonexistent. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Shadiram Balmukand [1972] 84 ITR 183 and Dwarka Prasad Subhas Chandra [1974] 94 ITR 154 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakkdhir Lalji [1972] 85. ITR 77 have also held that when the original basis of initiation of the penalty proceeding is altered or modified by the appellate authority, the authority initiating the penalty proceedings has no jurisdiction thereafter to proceed on the basis of the findings of the appe…

DCIT 8(3), MUMBAI vs. SABMILLER INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 12/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri B. Pruseth, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.12/M/2014 (Assessment Year: 2004-2005) फनाभ/ The DCIT-8(3), M/s. Sabmiller India Ltd, (Formerly known as SKOL Mumbai. Vs. Breweries Ltd), No.1, Mahal Industrial Estate, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 093. स्थामी रेखा सं./ PAN : AAICS2238R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri B. Pruseth, CIT-DR प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent by : Shri Rajan Vora सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 25.10.2016 घो…

ITO WD 4(4), THANE vs. VIDYAVARDHINI TRUST, THANE

In the result, all these three appeals filed in all the above said years, involving identical facts, are dismissed

ITA 3840/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…penalty proceedings qua these items. Thus, he had no jurisdiction to levy penalty with respect to these items. Similar was taken by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shadiram Balmukand 84 ITR 183 and CIT vs. Dwarka Prasad Subhash Chandra 94 ITR 154. Similar view has also been taken in two judgments of the ITAT in the case of ITO vs. Goldpar Hosiery Mills & Knitwears 77 ITD 340 (Chandigarh) and ACIT vs. Pardeep Publication 130 TTJ 92 (Amritsar). Thus, the penalty levied by the AO was illegal. 3.14. Further, it is noted by us that the ground raised by the Revenue is also irrelevant and unsust…

ITO WD 4(4), THANE vs. VIDYAVARDHINI TRUST, THANE

In the result, all these three appeals filed in all the above said years, involving identical facts, are dismissed

ITA 3839/MUM/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…penalty proceedings qua these items. Thus, he had no jurisdiction to levy penalty with respect to these items. Similar was taken by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shadiram Balmukand 84 ITR 183 and CIT vs. Dwarka Prasad Subhash Chandra 94 ITR 154. Similar view has also been taken in two judgments of the ITAT in the case of ITO vs. Goldpar Hosiery Mills & Knitwears 77 ITD 340 (Chandigarh) and ACIT vs. Pardeep Publication 130 TTJ 92 (Amritsar). Thus, the penalty levied by the AO was illegal. 3.14. Further, it is noted by us that the ground raised by the Revenue is also irrelevant and unsust…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FORTUNE TECHNOCOMPS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4539/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Arora, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…nalty in relation to an item of enhancement made by the first appellate authority. For this proposition, reliance is placed on the following decisions: (i). CIT vs. Shadiram Balmukand (1972) 84 ITR 183 (All.) (ii). CIT vs. Dwarka Prasad Subhash Chandra (1974) 94 ITR 154 (All) (iii). CIT vs. Ananda Bazar Patrika P. Ltd. (1979) 116 ITR 416(Cal.) He further submitted that all the particulars were furnished before the AO and the disallowance of loss was made by the ld. CIT(A) only on estimation of gross profit rate, on which divergent view can be taken. This does not constitute furnishing of inaccurate particulars by…