Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. All India Deaf and Dumb Society

283 ITR 113High Court2006#14638 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Judgments citing Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. All India Deaf and Dumb Society

INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY, KOTHAMANGALAM vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), ERNAKULAM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 54/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.P.T.Joy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member & Shri Soundararajan K, Judicial Member ITA No.165/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2012-2013 ITA No.54/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year2012-2013 Indira Gandhi Memorial Trust The Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) Nellikuzhy PO, Kothamangalam v. Ernakulam. Ernakulam – 686 691. PAN :AAATI5308K. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Sri.P.T.Joy, CA Respondent by :Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2024 Date of Hearing : 24.09.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : These two appeals filed by the assessee challenging…

INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY P.O vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), ERNAKULAM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 165/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.P.T.Joy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member & Shri Soundararajan K, Judicial Member ITA No.165/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2012-2013 ITA No.54/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year2012-2013 Indira Gandhi Memorial Trust The Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) Nellikuzhy PO, Kothamangalam v. Ernakulam. Ernakulam – 686 691. PAN :AAATI5308K. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Sri.P.T.Joy, CA Respondent by :Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2024 Date of Hearing : 24.09.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : These two appeals filed by the assessee challenging…

DEVINDER GUPTA & SONS (HUF),NEW DELHI vs. JCIT RANGE-30, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5394/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.5394/DEL/2019 Assessment Year 2013-14 Devinder Gupta & Sons (HUF), Vs. CIT, E-567, Greater Kailash-II, Range-30, New Delhi. New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AADHD7296J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Mansi Jain, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 24 11 2022 Date of pronouncement: 17 01 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed by the Assessee seeking to challenge the penalty imposed amoun…

TEJ NARAYAN AGARWAL, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-8, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 563/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…loan in cash. The decisions relied upon by the learned Counsel for the assessee, i.e. CIT vs. Deccan Designs (India) P Ltd reported in 347 ITR 580 (Mad) and also in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. All India Deaf and Dumb Society reported in 283 ITR 113 (Del) are to the effect that where the transactions are genuine and enough reasons are offered by the assessee to justify the cash transaction, the penalty is not leviable both u/s 271D Page 4 of 5 ITA Nos 1378 of 2015 and 563 of 2016 Tej Narayan Agarwal Hyderabad. and 271E of the Act. In view of the same, the assessee’s appeals are allowed.…

TEJ NARAYAN AGARWAL, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-8, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1378/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…loan in cash. The decisions relied upon by the learned Counsel for the assessee, i.e. CIT vs. Deccan Designs (India) P Ltd reported in 347 ITR 580 (Mad) and also in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. All India Deaf and Dumb Society reported in 283 ITR 113 (Del) are to the effect that where the transactions are genuine and enough reasons are offered by the assessee to justify the cash transaction, the penalty is not leviable both u/s 271D Page 4 of 5 ITA Nos 1378 of 2015 and 563 of 2016 Tej Narayan Agarwal Hyderabad. and 271E of the Act. In view of the same, the assessee’s appeals are allowed.…

SHRI NEERAJ PUROHIT,JAIPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 109/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jul 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Manish AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena, JCIT - DR
Section 269SSection 269TSection 271(1)Section 271ESection 40A(3)

…ction 273B – Reasonable explanation for such deposits – Penalty cannot be imposed – Purchase of goods – Balance due adjusted by book entries – No intention to evade tax – Penalty could not be imposed – Income Tax Act, 1961, ss. 269SS, 271D, 273B. (iii) [2006] 283 ITR 113 (Del) DIT(Exemp.) Vs. All India Deaf & Dumb Society Penalty – Loans in cash exceeding specified limit – Finding that there was no intent to violate law – Cancellation of penalty – Valid – Income Tax Act, 1961, ss. 271D, 271E. (iv) Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in case of Industrial Enterprises v. Dy. CIT (2000) 73 ITD 252 (Hyd) in para 17.2 of…

MARTIN ALEX CORREA,MUMBAI vs. JCIT RG 24(2), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2507/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Saktijit Deyआमकय अऩीर सं. / Ita No.2507/Mum./2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007–08) Shri Martin Alex Correa 3/7, Joseph Cottage …….………. अऩीरधथी / Chincholi, Bunder Road Appellant Malad (W), Mumbai 400 064 Pan – Aagpc1700M V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax ..…….………. प्रत्मथी / Range–24(4), Bandra (E), Mumbai Respondent ननधधारयती की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah यधजस्व की ओय से / Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra सुनवधई की तधयीख / आदेश घोषणध की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing – 24.09.2015 Date Of Order – 09.10.2015

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 269SSection 271D

…ses to be incurred on her behalf, hence, it is not in the nature of loan, therefore, penalty under section 271D of the Act cannot be imposed. For such proposition, he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in All India Deaf and Dumb Society, 283 ITR 113 (Del.). Further, he submitted that Ms. Edna Misquitta, is a distant relative of the assessee, therefore, the transaction between relatives do not invite the provisions of sections 269SS and 271D of the Act. For this purpose, he relied upon the decision of the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, in Vir Sales Corporation, 50 TTJ 130 (Ahd.). Lastly, the lear…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. All India Deaf and Dumb Society (283 ITR 113) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax