Dr. Hakeem S.A. Sajed Sattar v. Asstt. CIT

120 ITD 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#18838 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,254 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2019.

Judgments citing Dr. Hakeem S.A. Sajed Sattar v. Asstt. CIT

M/S N N Jewellers, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-1, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in

ITA 66/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Mar 2019AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA)For Respondent: Ms. Anuradha (JCIT)
Section 1Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ition is not the basis of imposition of penalty. Otherwise, also the sustained addition is also an estimated addition. The legal position in this regard has been succinctly given in the decision in the case of Dr. Hakeem S.A. Sajed Sattar v. Asstt. CIT [2009] 120 ITD 1 (Chennai). It has been held that on estimated addition, penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be imposed because there can be no concealment in these cases, nor that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Any estimate is an opinion which is taken subjectively, when this difference of opinions leads to any addition, it c…

M/S N N Jewellers, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-1, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in

ITA 64/JPR/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Mar 2019AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA)For Respondent: Ms. Anuradha (JCIT)
Section 1Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ition is not the basis of imposition of penalty. Otherwise, also the sustained addition is also an estimated addition. The legal position in this regard has been succinctly given in the decision in the case of Dr. Hakeem S.A. Sajed Sattar v. Asstt. CIT [2009] 120 ITD 1 (Chennai). It has been held that on estimated addition, penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be imposed because there can be no concealment in these cases, nor that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Any estimate is an opinion which is taken subjectively, when this difference of opinions leads to any addition, it c…

Sri Joy Barman, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-42(3), Kolkata

ITA 600/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

…)(c) of the Act, we therefore, set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty. 12.1 The legal position in this regard has been explained in the decision in the case of Dr. Hakeem S.A. Sajed Sattar v. Asstt. CIT [2009] 120 ITD 1 (Chennai). It has been held that on estimated addition, penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be imposed because there can be no concealment in these cases, nor that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of ITA No.599-600/Kol/2016 A.Ys 08-09 & 09-10 Sh JoyBarman Vs. ITO Wd-42(3) Kol. Page 13 income. Any estimate is an opinion whi…

Sri Joy Barman, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-42(3), Kolkata

ITA 599/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

…)(c) of the Act, we therefore, set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty. 12.1 The legal position in this regard has been explained in the decision in the case of Dr. Hakeem S.A. Sajed Sattar v. Asstt. CIT [2009] 120 ITD 1 (Chennai). It has been held that on estimated addition, penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be imposed because there can be no concealment in these cases, nor that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of ITA No.599-600/Kol/2016 A.Ys 08-09 & 09-10 Sh JoyBarman Vs. ITO Wd-42(3) Kol. Page 13 income. Any estimate is an opinion whi…

Dr. Hakeem S.A. Sajed Sattar v. Asstt. CIT (120 ITD 1) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax