CIT v. Vinaychand Harilal

120 ITR 752High Court1979#18841 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT v. Vinaychand Harilal

The DCIT-1(3)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. M/S Fern Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1402/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 139Section 143Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…uj) has also held that the imposition of penalty cannot be justified merely because of additions being sustained and similar view was earlier expressed by the same High Court in CIT vs. S.P. Bhatt (1974) 97 ITR 440 (Guj) and CIT vs. Vinay Chand Hiralal (1979) 120 ITR 752 (Guj) for penalty not to be levied and it was further made clear that when two views are reasonably possible on the facts and circumstances, the imposition of penalty cannot be justified. 13. No penalty when income disclosed in return and assessed income is NIL: Appellant states that a glance at the assessment order would reveal that the income o…

Shri Ghanshyam Dungarbhai Sutariya, Surat vs. The ACIT, Circle-8, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 2971/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ghanshyam Dungarbhai Sutaria, Vs. Acit, Circle-8, H.No. 1, 1St Floor, Sahaj Park Row Surat House, Hira Baug Circle, Vallabhacharya Road, Near Kailashdham Society, Ashwanikumar Road, Surat-395008 (Pan: Akkpp9318E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…owing case laws:- i) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decision dated 12.7.2001 in the case of Glass Lines Equipments Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2002) 253 ITR 454 (Guj.) ii) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decision dated 17.10.1978 in the case of CIT vs. Vinaychand Harilal (1979) 120 ITR 752 (Guj.) iii) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decision dated 09.10.2000 in the case of National Textiles vs. CIT (2001) 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) iv) ITAT, Ahmedabad ’A’ Bench Decision dated 30.11.2011 decided in ITA No. 2155/Adh/2010 (AY 94-95) in the case of ACIT vs. Manish Organics India Ltd. v) ITAT, Ahmedabad ’B’ Bench Decision dated 05.06.2015 decided in…

Shri Dipakkumar Keshavlal Patel, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gandhinagar

In the result, assessee’s appeal is thus allowed

ITA 419/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. J. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ent submitted was fully accepted by the income tax officer and no aby defects found in those documents. It is decided in the following cases that assessee offered an income to be tax in this circumstances no penalty is leviable. 1) CIT V/s. Vinaychand Harilal 120 ITR 752(Guj HC) 2) CIT V/s. Navneetlal Pchalal 213 ITR 69(Guj HC) 3) CIT V/s. Millax Cable Industries 261 ITR 675(Guj HC) 4) CIT V/s. Sureshchandra Mital 251 ITR (SC) In view of the above facts and submission we request you to drop the penalty proceedings." It is the finding of Learned Assessing Officer while imposing penalty that the assessee has fail…

Sukhdev Dhillon, Kaithal vs. ITO, W-3, Kaithal

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 144/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarsukhdev Dhillon Vs. The Ito S/O Shri. Jagir Singh Ward-3, Kaithal Vill-Bhagal, Kaithal

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Shri. Manjit Singh

Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH’B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sukhdev Dhillon Vs. The ITO S/o Shri. Jagir Singh Ward-3, Kaithal Vill-Bhagal, Kaithal PAN: AONPD3025K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri. Sudhir Sehgal Department by : Shri. Manjit Singh Date of hearing : 03/05/2018 Date of Pronouncement : 09/05/2018 O R D E R PER DR.B.R.R.KUMAR, A.M. : The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Karnal dt. 18/12/2017. 2. In the present appeal the Assessee has raised followi…