Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT

291 ITR 519Supreme Court of India2007#113 most cited

What is Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT authority for?

A penalty notice issued under Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to strike out the inapplicable limb (concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars) from the standard proforma, indicating non-application of mind. The initial burden of proving concealment or inaccurate particulars rests on the Revenue.

565

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274 · penalty notice invalidity · non-application of mind · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · burden of proof Revenue · striking off irrelevant clauses · standard proforma notice · levy of penalty

Also reported as

210 CTR 228

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 143(3)Section 132Section 153CSection 250Section 153ASection 270A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)concealment of incomesection 274levy of penaltysection 271(1)section 271section 271(1)(c)section 27section 139(1)

Judgments citing Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT

Sh Sumit Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 43/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eld that the Standard Proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard ITA Nos.46/Asr/2017 & 190/Asr/2015, Kasturi Lal Mahajan & Ors. Vs. DCIT proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether the assessee had concealed…

Sh Amit Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 42/ASR/2017[2087-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2087-09

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eld that the Standard Proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard ITA Nos.46/Asr/2017 & 190/Asr/2015, Kasturi Lal Mahajan & Ors. Vs. DCIT proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether the assessee had concealed…

Sh Amit Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 41/ASR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eld that the Standard Proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard ITA Nos.46/Asr/2017 & 190/Asr/2015, Kasturi Lal Mahajan & Ors. Vs. DCIT proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether the assessee had concealed…

Sh Amit Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 40/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eld that the Standard Proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard ITA Nos.46/Asr/2017 & 190/Asr/2015, Kasturi Lal Mahajan & Ors. Vs. DCIT proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether the assessee had concealed…

Sh. Kasturi Lal Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 190/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eld that the Standard Proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard ITA Nos.46/Asr/2017 & 190/Asr/2015, Kasturi Lal Mahajan & Ors. Vs. DCIT proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether the assessee had concealed…

Coast Line Shipping (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4943/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravi SawanaFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nal ground raised by the assessee is purely a legal ground, it is submitted that the same be admitted and adjudicated. 3. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: (a). National Thermal Power Co. Ltd [229 ITR 383 (SC)] (b). Dilip N. Shroff v. Joint CIT [291 ITR 519 (SC)] (c). SSA’s Emerald Meadows [2016] 73 taxmann.com (Kar) confirmed by the Supreme Court in [2016] 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC) / [2016] 242 Taxman 180 (SC) (d). Samson Perinchery [2017] 88 taxmann.com 413 (Bom) On hearing both the parties, we admit the additional ground since the ground taken is only a legal ground. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assess…

Coast Line Shipping (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4942/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravi SawanaFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nal ground raised by the assessee is purely a legal ground, it is submitted that the same be admitted and adjudicated. 3. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: (a). National Thermal Power Co. Ltd [229 ITR 383 (SC)] (b). Dilip N. Shroff v. Joint CIT [291 ITR 519 (SC)] (c). SSA’s Emerald Meadows [2016] 73 taxmann.com (Kar) confirmed by the Supreme Court in [2016] 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC) / [2016] 242 Taxman 180 (SC) (d). Samson Perinchery [2017] 88 taxmann.com 413 (Bom) On hearing both the parties, we admit the additional ground since the ground taken is only a legal ground. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assess…

Coast Line Shipping (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4941/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravi SawanaFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nal ground raised by the assessee is purely a legal ground, it is submitted that the same be admitted and adjudicated. 3. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: (a). National Thermal Power Co. Ltd [229 ITR 383 (SC)] (b). Dilip N. Shroff v. Joint CIT [291 ITR 519 (SC)] (c). SSA’s Emerald Meadows [2016] 73 taxmann.com (Kar) confirmed by the Supreme Court in [2016] 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC) / [2016] 242 Taxman 180 (SC) (d). Samson Perinchery [2017] 88 taxmann.com 413 (Bom) On hearing both the parties, we admit the additional ground since the ground taken is only a legal ground. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assess…

Sh. Piyush Saraf, Jammu vs. The Income Tax Officer, Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 146/ASR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudhry & Sh. O. P. Meenai.T.A. No. 146/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Raman Damathia DR
Section 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ld that the standard proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non- application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furnis…

Anil Agarwal, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of all the assessees are allowed

ITA 262/CTK/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.259/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Subash Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3716 A & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.260/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Sunil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3718 Q & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.261/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Rajesh Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Acepa 5209 R & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.262/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Anil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3717 B (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,Cas िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,CAsFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…d that the standard proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furni…

Rajesh Agarwal, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of all the assessees are allowed

ITA 261/CTK/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.259/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Subash Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3716 A & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.260/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Sunil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3718 Q & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.261/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Rajesh Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Acepa 5209 R & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.262/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Anil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3717 B (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,Cas िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,CAsFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…d that the standard proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furni…

Sunil Agarwal, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of all the assessees are allowed

ITA 260/CTK/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.259/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Subash Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3716 A & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.260/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Sunil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3718 Q & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.261/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Rajesh Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Acepa 5209 R & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.262/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Anil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3717 B (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,Cas िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,CAsFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…d that the standard proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furni…

Subash Agarwal, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of all the assessees are allowed

ITA 259/CTK/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.259/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Subash Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3716 A & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.260/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Sunil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3718 Q & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.261/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Rajesh Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Acepa 5209 R & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.262/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Anil Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Plot No.N-1/93 Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aatpa 3717 B (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,Cas िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal,CAsFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…d that the standard proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furni…

Sybase Software (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 10(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 151/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.151/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 बनाम/ Sybase Software (I) P. Ltd., Acit, 4Th Floor, Platina, C-29, G Range – 10(1) Vs. Block, Bandra (E). Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs5015K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Aliasger Rampurawala & Shri Pinal Chandramaniyam ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 03/10/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 10/12 /2019

For Appellant: Shri Aliasger Rampurawala &For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…8. We would also like to refer to the Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 2463 of 2010. In this case vide order dated 17.3.2010 it has been held that the law laid down in the Dilip Sheroff case 291 ITR 519 (SC) as to the meaning of word ‘concealment’ and ‘inaccurate’ continues to be a good law because what was overruled in the Dharmender Textile ITA No.151/Mum/2012. Sybase Software (I) P. Ltd .Mumbai case was only that part in Dilip Sheroff case where it was held that mensrea was a essential requirement of penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The Hon’ble Apex…

M/S. Banarsi Marble Stone Private Limited, Udaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 365/JODH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Smt. Raksha Birla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eld that the standard proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking off the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JOT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furnis…

Smt. Bhawana Nagori, Bhilwara vs. ITO, Ward-5, Bhilwara

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 380/JODH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: The Time Of Hearing. 5. The Petitioner Prays For Justice & Relief.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCHES, “SMC” JODHPUR BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Bhawana Nagori Vs. The ITO C/o Rajendra Jain, Advocate Ward-5 106, Akshay Deep Complex, Bhilwara 5th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur PAN NO: ADLPN9819Q Appellant Respondent Smt. Raksha Birla, C.A Assessee by : Revenue by : Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 28/11/2019 Date of Pronouncement : 28/11/2019 आदेश/Order PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dt. 17/04/2018 of Ld. CIT(A), Ajmer. 2. Following grounds have been r…

Shri Amar Singh Jain, Bhilwara vs. ITO, Ward-1, Bhilwara

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 387/JODH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Nov 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCHES, “SMC” JODHPUR BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Amar Singh Jain Vs. The ITO C/o Rajendra Jain, Advocate Ward-1, Bhilwara 106, Akshay Deep Complex, 5th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur PAN NO: APUPM0626D Appellant Respondent Smt. Raksha Birla, C.A Assessee by : Revenue by : Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 26/11/2019 Date of Pronouncement : 26/11/2019 आदेश/Order PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dt. 14/05/2018 of Ld. CIT(A), Ajmer. 2. The only grievance of the a…

Income Tax Officer-12(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Ampro Forms Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6079/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 12(1)(1) V. M/S. Ampro Forms Private Limited Room No. 226, 2Nd Floor 501-A, Vaibhav Apartment Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Jambli Galli, Borivali (West) Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 092 Pan: Aadca4479K (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : None

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. Michael Jerald
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 41(1)Section 69C

…the irrelevant portion i.e. limb of the notice and specify the charge for which he is proposing to initiate the penalty proceedings. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the penalty in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT [291 ITR 519], decisions of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the cases of CIT & Anr. v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory [359 ITR 565], CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows and also the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Trans Conduct (India) in ITA.No. 3198/Mum/2016. The Ld.CIT(A) observing that the Tribunal held that, when the Assessing Officer…

M/S- Ganapati Transport, Dhenkanal vs. ITO, Dhenkanal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 161/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.161/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Ganapati Transport, Vs. Ito Dhenkanal, Dhenkanal C/O-Mr. Khemchand Agarwalla Kali Bazar, At/Po-Bhuban, Dist-Dhenkanal-759017 स्थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Aagfg 0597 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 274w

…that the standard proforma of notice under section 274 of the Act without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 of the Act in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furn…

Sandeep Bhimrao Lad, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle-3, Thane

ITA 1620/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1620/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, DR
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 271Section 274

…rved that the penalty could not be deleted merely on the basis of defect pointed by the Ld.AR in the notice and has rejected the legal ground raised . 20 I.T.A. No. 1617 to 1620/Mum/2018 Sandeep Bhimrao Lad & Sunny Ashok Lad 14.Dilip N.Shroff v/s JCIT (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC) 15. GIT v/s Reliance Petroproducts Pvt Ltd (2010)322ITR0158(SC) 16.UOI v/s Raiasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills (2010)1GSTR 66(SC) 17 CIT V/s Atul Mohan Bindal (2009) 317 ITR 1 (SC) 18. Price Water House Coopers Pvt. Ltd.V/s CIT (2012)348 ITR 306(SC) 19. CIT V/s SomamrEvergreen Knits Ltd (2013)352ITR592(Bom.) 20. CIT V/s Smt Kaushalya (19…