CIT v. Shri Samson Perinchery

392 ITR 4High Court2017#175 most cited

What is CIT v. Shri Samson Perinchery authority for?

A penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act is unsustainable if it is initiated on one limb (e.g., concealment of income) but ultimately levied on the other limb (e.g., furnishing inaccurate particulars). This also applies if the initial penalty notice is vague or ambiguous regarding the specific charge.

417

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Samson Perinchery · 392 ITR 4 · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274 · penalty · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · penalty initiated on one limb · penalty levied on other limb · vague penalty notice · penalty unsustainable · non-application of mind

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 143(3)Section 115JCSection 142(1)Section 115JBSection 143Section 14A

Issues it is cited on

section 274(1)section 271(l)section 271(l)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularsmalabar industrialsection 274penalty under section 271(1)(c)concealment of incomepenalty u/s 271(1)(c)non-application of mindlevy of penalty

Judgments citing CIT v. Shri Samson Perinchery

Connerstone Ondemand Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation )-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3753/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…hat when penalty is initiated for the reason of misreporting the penalty could not have been levied for under reporting by the AO. In this regard the ld AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samson Perinchery [(392 ITR 4) (Bom.)]. We have while considering the appeal for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 have already held that the penalty under section 270A for under 17 ITA 3747, 3751, 3753, 3752 and 5677/Mum/2024 Cornerstone Ondemand Limited reporting is not sustainable in assessee's case. In our considered view our decision is mutatis mutandis applicable for AY 2019-20…

Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation )-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3752/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…hat when penalty is initiated for the reason of misreporting the penalty could not have been levied for under reporting by the AO. In this regard the ld AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samson Perinchery [(392 ITR 4) (Bom.)]. We have while considering the appeal for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 have already held that the penalty under section 270A for under 17 ITA 3747, 3751, 3753, 3752 and 5677/Mum/2024 Cornerstone Ondemand Limited reporting is not sustainable in assessee's case. In our considered view our decision is mutatis mutandis applicable for AY 2019-20…

Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation )-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3751/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…hat when penalty is initiated for the reason of misreporting the penalty could not have been levied for under reporting by the AO. In this regard the ld AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samson Perinchery [(392 ITR 4) (Bom.)]. We have while considering the appeal for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 have already held that the penalty under section 270A for under 17 ITA 3747, 3751, 3753, 3752 and 5677/Mum/2024 Cornerstone Ondemand Limited reporting is not sustainable in assessee's case. In our considered view our decision is mutatis mutandis applicable for AY 2019-20…

Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation )-291)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3747/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…hat when penalty is initiated for the reason of misreporting the penalty could not have been levied for under reporting by the AO. In this regard the ld AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samson Perinchery [(392 ITR 4) (Bom.)]. We have while considering the appeal for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 have already held that the penalty under section 270A for under 17 ITA 3747, 3751, 3753, 3752 and 5677/Mum/2024 Cornerstone Ondemand Limited reporting is not sustainable in assessee's case. In our considered view our decision is mutatis mutandis applicable for AY 2019-20…

Indian Chronicle Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal ofthe assessee is allowed

ITA 1275/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1275/Ahd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Indian Chronicle Ltd. बनाम/ Ito Gujarat Samacharbhavan, Ward4(3), Ahmedabad Vs. Khanpur,Ahmedabad - 380001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci0793H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & अपीलाथ" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondentby: Date Of Hearing 28/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 254(2)Section 271(1)(c)

…ancelled. An identical view was taken by the Co- ordinate Bench, Mumbai in the case of Samson Perinchery vs. ACIT in ITA No. 4625 to 4630/Mum/2013, which was upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Samson Perinchery [2017] 88 taxmann.com 413/392 ITR 4 (Bom.). 11. It is found that notice u/s.274 of the Act was issued by the AO on 30.11.2009 i.e. on the same date when the order u/s.143(3) of the Act was passed. Thus, the notice was for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income as recorded by the AO in the assessment order. However, the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was imposed for concea…

Dakshinamoorthy Kumaresan, Thiruvarur vs. Income Tax Officer, Thiruvarur

ITA 2452/CHNY/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2024AY 2016-2017
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…2 ITA No.2452/Chny/2024 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee had not filed his return of income for the AY 2016-17 despite receipt of salary amounting to Rs.16,65,727/- earned during the relevant year as per the available information. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was re-opened by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. In response to notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee filed ITR on 26.07.2022 declaring Total income of Rs.12,89,580/. The assessment was completed by the AO u/s 147 of the Act on 25.05.2023 accepting the returned income declared. However, as the assessee had offered income for tax…

The Koraput Central Cooperative Bank Ltd, Jeypore, Koraput vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 348/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack19 Nov 2024AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, कटक कटक "यायपीठ "यायपीठ,कटक आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण कटक कटक "यायपीठ "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/ITA No.348/CTK/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) वष" The Koraput Central Cooperative Vs ITO, NFAC, Delhi/ Bank Limited, ACIT, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur Head Office, NKT Road, Vikram Nagar, Near Laxmi Talkies Jeypore, Koraput PAN No. : AAAAT 2619 K (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant…

M/S Michelin Global Mobility Sa., Switzerland vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – Circle Int. Tax 2 (2)(1), New Delhi

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2657/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Delhi22 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.2656 & 2657/िद"ी/2024 (िन.व. 2015-16 & 2016-17)

For Appellant: Ms. Ananaya KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ery of facts subsequent to the imposition of penalty cannot validate the order of penalty which, when passed, was not sustainable.” [Emphasized by us] 7. Similar view has been expressed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Samson Perinchery, 392 ITR 4 (Bom). 4 ITA Nos. 2656 & 2657/DEL/2024 (AYs 2015-16 & 2016-17) 8. Thus, in light of undisputed facts and the decisions referred above, we hold that the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act in the instant case cannot be sustained as the same has not been levied on a charge for which satisfaction was recorded. In the result, impugned order is s…

M/S Michelin Global Mobility Sa, Switzerland vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), New Delhi

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2656/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.2656 & 2657/िद"ी/2024 (िन.व. 2015-16 & 2016-17)

For Appellant: Ms. Ananaya KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ery of facts subsequent to the imposition of penalty cannot validate the order of penalty which, when passed, was not sustainable.” [Emphasized by us] 7. Similar view has been expressed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Samson Perinchery, 392 ITR 4 (Bom). 4 ITA Nos. 2656 & 2657/DEL/2024 (AYs 2015-16 & 2016-17) 8. Thus, in light of undisputed facts and the decisions referred above, we hold that the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act in the instant case cannot be sustained as the same has not been levied on a charge for which satisfaction was recorded. In the result, impugned order is s…

Amit Kapoor, Chennai vs. CIT, Exemptions, Chennai

ITA 1445/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1415/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Shri Samiappagounder Dharmaraj, The Addl.Cit, 56/88, Rayapuram Extension, Range-1, 1St Street, Tirupur. Tirupur-641 601. [Pan: Adypd 3863 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. SridharFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 270ASection 271D

…f the judgments (infra) though in the context of penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act including that of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court: i) Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT reported in (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom) (FB) ii) CIT v. Sam-son Pondichery [2017] 392 ITR 4 (Bom) TXA No. 1154 of 2014 dated January 5, 2017; iii) CIT (Pr.) v. Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation P. Ltd. [2020] 16 ITR-OL 111 (Bom) Tax Appeal No.24 of 2019 dated November 11, 2019; iv) Pr. CIT v. New Era Sova Mine [2021] 433 ITR 249 (Bom) Tax Appeal Nos. 70 of 2019 dated June 18, 2019; and v) Pr. CIT v. Goa Dourado Promotions Pvt. Ltd. [2021…

Samiappagounder Dharmaraj, Tirupur vs. Addl. CIT, Range-1, Tirupur

ITA 1415/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1415/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Shri Samiappagounder Dharmaraj, The Addl.Cit, 56/88, Rayapuram Extension, Range-1, 1St Street, Tirupur. Tirupur-641 601. [Pan: Adypd 3863 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. SridharFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 270ASection 271D

…f the judgments (infra) though in the context of penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act including that of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court: i) Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT reported in (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom) (FB) ii) CIT v. Sam-son Pondichery [2017] 392 ITR 4 (Bom) TXA No. 1154 of 2014 dated January 5, 2017; iii) CIT (Pr.) v. Goa Coastal Resorts and Recreation P. Ltd. [2020] 16 ITR-OL 111 (Bom) Tax Appeal No.24 of 2019 dated November 11, 2019; iv) Pr. CIT v. New Era Sova Mine [2021] 433 ITR 249 (Bom) Tax Appeal Nos. 70 of 2019 dated June 18, 2019; and v) Pr. CIT v. Goa Dourado Promotions Pvt. Ltd. [2021…

DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Michael Page International Recruitment P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Appeal and CO filed by the Revenue and Assessee respectively, stands dismissed

ITA 2661/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Michael Page Income Tax -14(1)(1), International Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Recruitment Pvt. Ltd., 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. M.K. Road, 2 North Avenue Maker Mumbai - 400020 Maxity, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aagcm8425N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Hirali Desai, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 32Section 37Section 37(1)

….com 250 and by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T. Ashok Pai vs. CIT (292 ITR 11) ITA No.2661/M/2023 & CO no. 04/M/2023 11 M/s. Michael Page International Recruitment Pvt. Ltd. and by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samson Perinchery (392 ITR 4) and many other decisions and by observing “that the AO has not adhered to the satisfaction recorded for initiating the legal proceedings while imposing the penalty. The penalty was initiated for furnishing the inaccurate particulars of income but while imposing the penalty, the AO has applied both the limbs, which is incorrect approach”, ultimatel…

M/S.Enrica Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1165/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 271ASection 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी मंजूनाथा. जी, लेखा सद" एवं "ी मनोमोहनदास, "ाियक सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1164 & 1165/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 M/s.Enrica Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner of – v. No.85, Matruvazhi Salai, Income Tax, (Bypass Road), Poonamallee, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai-600 056. Chennai. [PAN: AAACE 9199 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Shri D. Anand,…

M/S Enrica Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1164/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 271ASection 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी मंजूनाथा. जी, लेखा सद" एवं "ी मनोमोहनदास, "ाियक सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1164 & 1165/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 M/s.Enrica Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner of – v. No.85, Matruvazhi Salai, Income Tax, (Bypass Road), Poonamallee, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai-600 056. Chennai. [PAN: AAACE 9199 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Shri D. Anand,…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl Ciat 2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 120/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 43BSection 80

…198 of of the note filed on 25th September 2023) e) JSW Cement Ltd. (2022) 143 taxmann.com 312 (Mum Tribunal) (see pages 199 to 207of the note filed on 25th September 2023) Other cases relied upon: ITA.NO. 120/MUM/2013 (A.Y: 2008-09) Tata Chemicals Ltd 1. SBI 420 ITR 376 (Bom.H.C.) 2019, Pg 3-5 para 4-11 (Refer C.L.- 11, pgs 176-182) 2. IPCL ITA No. 1428/2016 dt. 22.01.2019 (Bom.H.C.), Pg 2-3 para 2-4-(Refer C.L.-12pgs 183-185) 92. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities. 93. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the records that the asses…

Vikas Sharma, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 256/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 256/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Vikas Sharma Quarter No.6-A, Ruabandha Sector, Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 006 Pan : Ddcps1720P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Bhilai, Durg (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal &For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…we find that the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay, in the case of Pr. CIT (Central), Bengaluru Vs. Golden Peace Hotels & Resorts (P) Ltd. (2021) 124 tamnn.com 249 (SC), by drawing support from its earlier order in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Samson Perinchery (2017) 392 ITR 4 (Bom) and PCIT Vs. New Era Sova Mine (2020) 420 ITR 376 (Bom), had observed that AO, while issuing show-cause, should clearly indicate that, as per him, the case of the assessee involves concealment of particulars of income or there is the furnishing of inaccurate particulars. It was further observed that if the notice is issued in printed form, th…

Shri Shivaji Dattatray Sonawane, Nashik vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 707/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryshivaji Dattatray Sonawane, Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Sonawane Mala, Samangaon Nashik. Road, Sinnar Phata, Nashik Road, Nashik. Pan: Acaps 3868 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Naimish Sanjay Dixit Revenue By : Shri M.G. Jasnani, Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/09/2023 O R D E R Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 05.04.2023 For A.Y.2016-17 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: Shri Naimish Sanjay DixitFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani, DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ataka High Court also in the case of CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory [2013] 263 CTR 153 (Kar) has taken the view that there must be specify charge for levying the penalty. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Samson Perinchery [2017] 392 ITR 4 (Bom) has observed and held that where there is no proper satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings and in absence of proper show-cause notice to the assessee, there is no merit in levying penalty. In the present case, from the facts and circumstances, we observe that the AO, while initiating the penalty proceedings u/sec. 271(1)(c), has not…

Hasmukhbhai Dahyabhai Patel, Vapi vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 115/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr- DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…othered to strike down the relevant portion of the printed form in order to indicate whether the satisfaction is based upon the concealment of particulars or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. He relies on CIT v. Samson Perinchery [2017] 88 taxmann.com 413/392 ITR 4 (Bom.) and CIT vs. New Era Sova Mine [2019] SCC online Bom.1032 to submit that on the basis of such a defective notice, award of penalty can never be sustained. 5. We have carefully examined the record as well as duly considered the rival contentions. Both the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the ITAT have categorically held that in the present ca…

Smt. Dipalben Manish Patel, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed in terms of our observations above

ITA 215/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 215/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Dipalben Manish Patel 4-502, Near Maharashtra Mandal, Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Alupp3271B

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…of Pr. CIT (Central), Bengaluru Vs. Golden Peace Hotels & Resorts (P) Ltd. (2021) 124 tamnn.com 249 (SC), by 12 Smt. Dipalben Manish Patel Vs. ITO-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) drawing support from its earlier order in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Samson Perinchery (2017) 392 ITR 4 (Bom) and PCIT Vs. New Era Sova Mine (2020) 420 ITR 376 (Bom), had observed that AO while issuing show-cause should clearly indicate that as per him the case of the assessee involves concealment of particulars of income; or there is furnishing of inaccurate particulars. It was further observed, that if the notice is issued in the printed form, then…

Ashok Kumar Singh, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-2(2), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed in terms of our observations above

ITA 150/RPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 150/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ashok Kumar Singh P-10, Rishab Green City, Pulgaon, Durg-491 001 (C.G) Pan : Bcfps1394K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-2(2), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…we find that the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Pr. CIT (Central), Bengaluru Vs. Golden Peace Hotels & Resorts (P) Ltd. (2021) 124 tamnn.com 249 (SC), by drawing support from its earlier order in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Samson Perinchery (2017) 392 ITR 4 (Bom) and PCIT Vs. New Era Sova Mine (2020) 420 ITR 376 (Bom), had observed that AO while issuing show-cause should clearly 12 Ashok Kumar Singh Vs. ITO-2(2), Bhilai indicate that as per him the case of the assessee involves concealment of particulars of income; or there is furnishing of inaccurate particulars. It was further observed, that if the…