CIT v. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah

11 ITR 308Reported decision#7635 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 272bbbsection 271bbsection 272aasection 271fbsection 272bbsection 271casection 272bsection 271basection 271fasection 271gsection 272section 271c

Judgments citing CIT v. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4439/DEL/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…lar issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for not signing the concerned form has been deleted by the Co- Jindal vide order dated 28.02.2017 in ITA No. 6425 & 6426/Del/2015. • Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT Vs. V. V. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) held that the penalty cannot be levied if there is a reasonable cause. • The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. (83 ITR 26) held that an order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi- criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, eith…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4438/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…lar issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for not signing the concerned form has been deleted by the Co- Jindal vide order dated 28.02.2017 in ITA No. 6425 & 6426/Del/2015. • Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT Vs. V. V. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) held that the penalty cannot be levied if there is a reasonable cause. • The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. (83 ITR 26) held that an order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi- criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, eith…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4437/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…lar issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for not signing the concerned form has been deleted by the Co- Jindal vide order dated 28.02.2017 in ITA No. 6425 & 6426/Del/2015. • Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT Vs. V. V. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) held that the penalty cannot be levied if there is a reasonable cause. • The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. (83 ITR 26) held that an order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi- criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, eith…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4436/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…lar issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for not signing the concerned form has been deleted by the Co- Jindal vide order dated 28.02.2017 in ITA No. 6425 & 6426/Del/2015. • Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT Vs. V. V. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) held that the penalty cannot be levied if there is a reasonable cause. • The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. (83 ITR 26) held that an order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi- criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, eith…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4435/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…lar issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for not signing the concerned form has been deleted by the Co- Jindal vide order dated 28.02.2017 in ITA No. 6425 & 6426/Del/2015. • Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT Vs. V. V. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) held that the penalty cannot be levied if there is a reasonable cause. • The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. (83 ITR 26) held that an order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi- criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, eith…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4434/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…lar issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for not signing the concerned form has been deleted by the Co- Jindal vide order dated 28.02.2017 in ITA No. 6425 & 6426/Del/2015. • Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT Vs. V. V. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) held that the penalty cannot be levied if there is a reasonable cause. • The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. (83 ITR 26) held that an order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi- criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, eith…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4433/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…lar issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for not signing the concerned form has been deleted by the Co- Jindal vide order dated 28.02.2017 in ITA No. 6425 & 6426/Del/2015. • Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT Vs. V. V. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) held that the penalty cannot be levied if there is a reasonable cause. • The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. (83 ITR 26) held that an order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi- criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, eith…

CHARU MODI BHARTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4120/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…bhash Sathe vs. 2. ACIT: ITA Nos. 2765 to 2771/Del/2016 Re: No Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act when assessment order has been passed 143(3) of the Act Copy of decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah: 11 ITR 308 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya 4. Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust: 115 TTJ 419. Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Paigam Impex Private 5. Limited vs. ACIT: ITA Nos. 4787 to 4791 of 2013 10 I.T.As. No.4115 to 4120/DEL/2015 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribun…

CHARU MODI BHARTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4119/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…bhash Sathe vs. 2. ACIT: ITA Nos. 2765 to 2771/Del/2016 Re: No Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act when assessment order has been passed 143(3) of the Act Copy of decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah: 11 ITR 308 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya 4. Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust: 115 TTJ 419. Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Paigam Impex Private 5. Limited vs. ACIT: ITA Nos. 4787 to 4791 of 2013 10 I.T.As. No.4115 to 4120/DEL/2015 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribun…

CHARU MODI BHARTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4118/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…bhash Sathe vs. 2. ACIT: ITA Nos. 2765 to 2771/Del/2016 Re: No Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act when assessment order has been passed 143(3) of the Act Copy of decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah: 11 ITR 308 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya 4. Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust: 115 TTJ 419. Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Paigam Impex Private 5. Limited vs. ACIT: ITA Nos. 4787 to 4791 of 2013 10 I.T.As. No.4115 to 4120/DEL/2015 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribun…

CHARU MODI BHARTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4117/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…bhash Sathe vs. 2. ACIT: ITA Nos. 2765 to 2771/Del/2016 Re: No Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act when assessment order has been passed 143(3) of the Act Copy of decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah: 11 ITR 308 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya 4. Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust: 115 TTJ 419. Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Paigam Impex Private 5. Limited vs. ACIT: ITA Nos. 4787 to 4791 of 2013 10 I.T.As. No.4115 to 4120/DEL/2015 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribun…

CHARU MODI BHARTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4116/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…bhash Sathe vs. 2. ACIT: ITA Nos. 2765 to 2771/Del/2016 Re: No Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act when assessment order has been passed 143(3) of the Act Copy of decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah: 11 ITR 308 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya 4. Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust: 115 TTJ 419. Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Paigam Impex Private 5. Limited vs. ACIT: ITA Nos. 4787 to 4791 of 2013 10 I.T.As. No.4115 to 4120/DEL/2015 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribun…

CHARU MODI BHARTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4115/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…bhash Sathe vs. 2. ACIT: ITA Nos. 2765 to 2771/Del/2016 Re: No Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act when assessment order has been passed 143(3) of the Act Copy of decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah: 11 ITR 308 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya 4. Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust: 115 TTJ 419. Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Paigam Impex Private 5. Limited vs. ACIT: ITA Nos. 4787 to 4791 of 2013 10 I.T.As. No.4115 to 4120/DEL/2015 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribun…

CHARU MODI BHARTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4114/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…bhash Sathe vs. 2. ACIT: ITA Nos. 2765 to 2771/Del/2016 Re: No Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act when assessment order has been passed 143(3) of the Act Copy of decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah: 11 ITR 308 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya 4. Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust: 115 TTJ 419. Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Paigam Impex Private 5. Limited vs. ACIT: ITA Nos. 4787 to 4791 of 2013 10 I.T.As. No.4115 to 4120/DEL/2015 Copy of decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribun…

CIT v. Vedlapatla Veera 3. Venkatataramiah (11 ITR 308) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax