CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows

73 Taxmann.com 248Supreme Court of India2016#48 most cited

What is CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows authority for?

A notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether penalty proceedings are for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Such lack of specificity vitiates the penalty proceedings.

953

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows · section 274 · section 271(1)(c) · penalty notice validity · specific charge penalty · concealment of income · inaccurate particulars of income · vitiates penalty proceedings · Manjunatha Cotton

Also reported as

242 Taxmann 180

Sections most often in play

Section 274Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 143(2)Section 271AABSection 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 271(l)section 271(l)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomepenalty proceedings initiatedsection 274furnishing inaccurate particularssection 271aabconcealment of incomepenalty u/s 271(1)(c)penalty under section 271(1)(c)section 271(1)levy of penalty

Judgments citing CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows

Pravinchandra Premjibhai Raninga, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals are allowed

ITA 1447/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Adjournment ApplicationFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ITA Nos.1448, 1449/Ahd/2019 & 1446, 1447/Ahd/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1448 & 1449/Ahd/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Manjriben Pravinchandra Raninga, vs. Income Tax Officer, 12, Manichandra Society, Part-1, Ward 3(1)(3), Ahmedabad. Nr. Surdhara Circle, Sal Hospital Road, Ahmedabad. [PAN – ABXPR 2503 F] ITA Nos.1446 & 1447/Ahd/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Pravinchandra Premjibhai Raninga, vs. Income Tax Officer,…

Pravinchandra Premjibhai Raninga, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals are allowed

ITA 1446/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Adjournment ApplicationFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ITA Nos.1448, 1449/Ahd/2019 & 1446, 1447/Ahd/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1448 & 1449/Ahd/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Manjriben Pravinchandra Raninga, vs. Income Tax Officer, 12, Manichandra Society, Part-1, Ward 3(1)(3), Ahmedabad. Nr. Surdhara Circle, Sal Hospital Road, Ahmedabad. [PAN – ABXPR 2503 F] ITA Nos.1446 & 1447/Ahd/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Pravinchandra Premjibhai Raninga, vs. Income Tax Officer,…

Gautam Hiralal Gandhi, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed reversing the findings of the lower authorities

ITA 1485/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Gautam Hiralal Gandhi The Dcit, 1801, Chandanbala, Circle 22(1) Retilal R Thakkar Marg, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Vs. Malabar Hill S.O, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 006 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aabpg7668F Assessee By : Shri Rajnikant Chaniyari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Hoshang B Irani, Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022

For Appellant: Shri Rajnikant Chaniyari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B Irani, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Gautam Hiralal Gandhi The DCIT, 1801, Chandanbala, Circle 22(1) Retilal R Thakkar Marg, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Vs. Malabar Hill S.O, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 006 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AABPG7668F Assessee by : Shri Rajnikant Chaniyari, AR Revenue by : Shri Hoshang B Irani, DR Date of hearing: 26.05.2022 Date of pronouncement : 31.05.2022 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of income-t…

Raipur Securities and Investment Limited, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Raipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issue

ITA 164/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 164/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Raipur Securities & Investment Ltd. Mig 21, Indravati Colony, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccr4419F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Puja Bajaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…if the notice does not specify the charge and if the AO does not strike off the irrelevant part in the notice, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained: - CIT & Another vs Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning 359 ITR 565 (Kar.), SLP dismissed on 5.8.2016 vide (2016) 386 ITR 13 (St.). Manjunatha followed in CIT vs Samson Perinchery (Bom.) M.G. Contractor Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT, ITA no. 7034 to 7038/Del./2014 order dt. 19.09.2016 of "E" Bench. Pr. CIT vs Smt. Baisetty Revathi (2017) 398 ITR 88 (T & AP) Indrani Sunil Pillai vs ACIT (2018) 52 CCH 56 (Mum. Trib.) Jeetmal Choraria vs ACIT in ITA no. 956/Kol.2016 order dt. 01.12.20…

Rakesh Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-34(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 7804/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7804/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rakesh Gupta, Acit, बनाम H – 87, Ashok Viohar, Circle : 34 (1), Phase – 1, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 052. Pan No. Aewpg7366R अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 10(38)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68Section 69C

…I.T.A. No. 7804/Del/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7804/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rakesh Gupta, ACIT, बनाम H – 87, Ashok Viohar, Circle : 34 (1), Phase – 1, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 052. PAN No. AEWPG7366R अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे / Assessee by : N o n e; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department by : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R.; सुनवाईक"तार"ख / Date of hearing : 18/05/2022 उ"ोषणाक"तार"ख / Pronouncement on : 25/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER C. N.…

Neelkanth Town Planners Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circe- 27, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 588/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2005-06 Neelkanth Town Planners Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, G-36, 2Nd Floor, Outer Circle, Central Circle-27, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn2742D Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.05.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A.D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 588/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2005-06 Neelkanth Town Planners Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, G-36, 2nd Floor, Outer Circle, Central Circle-27, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN2742D Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 10.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 20.05.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-29, New Delhi da…

Unified Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Karnal

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3365/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3364/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 M/S Unified Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 502, D Mall, Netaji Subhash Palace, Central Circle, Pitampura, New Delhi Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacu7954Q

For Appellant: Ms. Kamal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: None (Adj. Application)
Section 139(1)Section 22(1)Section 22(4)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A.D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 3364/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 M/s Unified Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, 502, D Mall, Netaji Subhash Palace, Central Circle, Pitampura, New Delhi Karnal (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACU7954Q ITA No. 3365/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 M/s Unified Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, 502, D Mall, Netaji Subhash Palace, Central Circle, Pitampura, New Delhi Karnal (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACU7955R Assessee by : Ms. Kamal Sharma, Adv. Revenue by :…

Unified Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Karnal

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3364/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3364/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 M/S Unified Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 502, D Mall, Netaji Subhash Palace, Central Circle, Pitampura, New Delhi Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacu7954Q

For Appellant: Ms. Kamal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: None (Adj. Application)
Section 139(1)Section 22(1)Section 22(4)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A.D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 3364/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 M/s Unified Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, 502, D Mall, Netaji Subhash Palace, Central Circle, Pitampura, New Delhi Karnal (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACU7954Q ITA No. 3365/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 M/s Unified Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, 502, D Mall, Netaji Subhash Palace, Central Circle, Pitampura, New Delhi Karnal (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACU7955R Assessee by : Ms. Kamal Sharma, Adv. Revenue by :…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -9, Kolkata vs. Mala Roy

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed as no

ITAT/7/2022HC Calcutta17 May 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 132Section 260ASection 271Section 271A

…inst the assessee as to whether it is for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The said decision of the High Court of Karnataka was affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision reported in (2016) 73 Taxmann.com 248 (SC). On the same lines it is the decision of this court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central - 2, Kolkata Versus Brijendra Kumar Poddar in ITAT No. 215 of 2018 dated 23.11.2021. As pointed out earlier, the show cause notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 271 of the Act did not furnish any…

Vishnu & Co.Trademarks P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2625/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shripradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryvishnu & Co. Trademarks P. Vs. Acit, Ltd, Circle-26(2), R-649, New Rajnider Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccv5192K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhavi, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, Ld. CIT DR
Section 250(6)Section 271Section 274

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIPRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Vishnu & Co. Trademarks P. Vs. ACIT, Ltd, Circle-26(2), R-649, New Rajnider Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACCV5192K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri R. S. Singhavi, CA Revenue by: Shri T. Kipgen, Ld. CIT DR Date of Hearing 18/04/2022 Date of pronouncement 17/05/2022 O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 14.01.2019 impugned herein passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (App…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 912/CHNY/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 911/CHNY/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 910/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 909/CHNY/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 908/CHNY/2020[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 907/CHNY/2020[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 906/CHNY/2020[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 905/CHNY/2020[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…urt in the case of CIT V/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 73 Taxmann.com 241) which was agitated by the revenue before Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Special Leave Petition, against the same, was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 05/08/2016 which is reported at 73 Taxmann.com 248. This decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory has subsequently been followed extensively in catena of judicial pronouncements rendered by various Hon’ble High Courts as well as different benches of Tribunal and taken a view that non-framing of specific charge in the show-cause notice would v…

Malook Nagar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-15, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5824/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5821/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5822/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5823/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5824/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Malook Nagar, Vs Acit, D-3/10, Paschimi Marg, Central Circle-15, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adkpn2266L Assessee By : Sh. Akshat Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Akshat Jain, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A.D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 5821/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 ITA No. 5822/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 ITA No. 5823/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 5824/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Malook Nagar, Vs ACIT, D-3/10, Paschimi Marg, Central Circle-15, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi-110057 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADKPN2266L Assessee by : Sh. Akshat Jain, CA & Sh. Rajat Jain, CA Revenue by : Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 12.05.2022 Date of Pronounc…

Malook Nagar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-15, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5823/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5821/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5822/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5823/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5824/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Malook Nagar, Vs Acit, D-3/10, Paschimi Marg, Central Circle-15, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adkpn2266L Assessee By : Sh. Akshat Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Akshat Jain, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A.D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 5821/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 ITA No. 5822/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 ITA No. 5823/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 5824/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Malook Nagar, Vs ACIT, D-3/10, Paschimi Marg, Central Circle-15, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi-110057 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADKPN2266L Assessee by : Sh. Akshat Jain, CA & Sh. Rajat Jain, CA Revenue by : Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 12.05.2022 Date of Pronounc…