CIT v. Virgo Marketing (P) Ltd.

171 Taxmann 156High Court2008#193 most cited

What is CIT v. Virgo Marketing (P) Ltd. authority for?

The assessment order must clearly specify the reason for initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) and explicitly state whether it is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Failure to identify the specific limb under which penalty is initiated renders the penalty unsustainable.

384

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Virgo Marketing · Section 271(1)(c) · initiation of penalty proceedings · assessment order · specific charge · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · levy of penalty · Section 274 · Section 270A

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Virgo Marketing (P) Ltd.

Sri Rajan R Srinivasan, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Year

ITA 521/BANG/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazshri Rajan R Srinivasan, No.2965, 12Th Main, Hal 2Nd Stage, Indiranagar, Bengaluru-560008. … Appellant Pan:Afsps 7509F Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Incomet-Ax, Circle 1(2)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant By : Shri Bairav Kuttaiah, Advocate. Respondent By : Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/07/2019 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan, Vp: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16/01/2009 Of The Cit(Appeals)-2, Bengaluru, Relating To Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. In This Appeal, Th Assessee Has Challenged The Order Of The Cit(Appeals) Wherein The Cit(Appeals) Confirmed The Order Of The Ao Imposing Penalty On The Assessee U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income- Tax Act,1961 ['The Act' For Short]. The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Under Which The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Was Imposed On The Assessee By The Ao Are As Follows: The Assessee Is An Individual Deriving Income Under The Head ‘Salary’ From M/S. Indus Biotech Pvt. Ltd., Pune Besides Income From Business. The Ao Concluded The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year 2006-07. The Assessee Claimed As Expenditure Incurred In Connection With Business Of The Assessee A Page 2 Of 10 Sum Of Rs.8,57,872/-. These Expenses Were Disallowed By The Ao For The Reason That They Were Purely Personal In Nature & The Assessee Could Not Establish The Nexus Of Those Expenses With The Business Of The Assessee. In Respect Of Addition Made As Aforesaid, Penalty Proceedings Were Initiated & Levied On The Assessee For Concealing Particulars Of Income & Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars Of Income.

For Appellant: Shri Bairav Kuttaiah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT and SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Shri Rajan R Srinivasan, No.2965, 12th Main, HAL 2nd Stage, Indiranagar, Bengaluru-560008. … Appellant PAN:AFSPS 7509F Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Incomet-ax, Circle 1(2)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant by : Shri Bairav Kuttaiah, Advocate. Respondent by : Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 10/07/2019 Date of pronouncement: 17/07/2019 O R D E R Per N.V. VASUDEVAN, VP: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 16/01/2009 of the CIT(Appe…

Arun Ravindranath Sawhney, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 7192/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7192/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2007-08) Arun Ravindranath Sawhney The Dy. Commissioner Of 502, Daisylea Apartment, 17- Income Tax, Central Circle A Mount Pleasant Road, 3(4), Old Acit Central Vs. Mumbai-400 006 Circle 24& 26 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aafps4688F

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: S/shri Anadi Varma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री जी. मंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 7192/Mum/2016 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2007-08) Arun Ravindranath Sawhney The Dy. Commissioner of 502, Daisylea Apartment, 17- Income Tax, Central Circle A Mount Pleasant Road, 3(4), Old ACIT Central Vs. Mumbai-400 006 Circle 24& 26 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./P…