Dr. Naman A. Shastri v. ACIT

155 ITD 1003Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#7267 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Also reported as

63 Taxmann.com 363

Issues it is cited on

section 158bfasection 271aaasection 153(a)section 91protective assessmentsection 158bbsection 158bcindexed cost of acquisitionsection 48section 271aasection 292csection 271a

Judgments citing Dr. Naman A. Shastri v. ACIT

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 218/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 217/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 216/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 215/AHD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 214/AHD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 213/AHD/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 212/AHD/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 211/AHD/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI ROHITJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 210/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

…levied in this assessment year as this is the search year in view of the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act as the search took place on 21.09.2010, the reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 is apt in the present case. Thus, the Revenue has invoked incorrect provisions of the penalty and that cannot be said the fault of the assesse. Therefore, penalty does not sustain. Hence appeal of the assessee being ITA No.801/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed.” 33. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts we are of the conside…

SHRI GIRISH VITTHALBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 801/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri P.B. Parmar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 271(1)(c)

…under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied in this assessment year as this is the search year and the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act will be applicable. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that in all the appeals penalty does not sustain. 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order, order of the CIT(A) and penalty order. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. In this particular case of the assessee, the Revenue is not invoked the proper limb of…

SHRI GIRISH VITHALBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-6(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 800/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri P.B. Parmar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 271(1)(c)

…under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied in this assessment year as this is the search year and the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act will be applicable. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that in all the appeals penalty does not sustain. 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order, order of the CIT(A) and penalty order. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. In this particular case of the assessee, the Revenue is not invoked the proper limb of…

SHRI GIRISH VITHALBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-6(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 799/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri P.B. Parmar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 271(1)(c)

…under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied in this assessment year as this is the search year and the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act will be applicable. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that in all the appeals penalty does not sustain. 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order, order of the CIT(A) and penalty order. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. In this particular case of the assessee, the Revenue is not invoked the proper limb of…

SHRI GIRISH VITHALBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-6(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 798/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri P.B. Parmar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 271(1)(c)

…under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied in this assessment year as this is the search year and the provisions of Section 271AAA of the Act will be applicable. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri vs. ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that in all the appeals penalty does not sustain. 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order, order of the CIT(A) and penalty order. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. In this particular case of the assessee, the Revenue is not invoked the proper limb of…

T.SAIMATHA,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 318/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Mar 2020AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.318/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) T.Saimatha Vs Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.47-11-9 Income Tax Dwarakanagar Circle-1(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan :Acdpt7788H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.320/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) T.Satyanarayana Vs Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.47-11-9 Income Tax Dwarakanagar Circle-1(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aaqpt9170N] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri V.Rama Mohan, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.02.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Rama Mohan, DR
Section 132Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.318/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) T.Saimatha Vs Asst.Commissioner of D.No.47-11-9 Income Tax Dwarakanagar Circle-1(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [PAN :ACDPT7788H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.320/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) T.Sat…

MUNIR M. KHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CC -7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee is allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7138/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathamunir Khan Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-7(1) 654, 6Th Floor 1404, ‘A’ Wing Raj Classic Bldg Aaykar Bhawan Off. Yari Road, Versova M.K.Road Andheri(W) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 061 Pan/Gir No.Asgpk3313A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Dcit, Central Circle-7(1) Vs. Munir Khan 654, 6Th Floor 1404, ‘A’ Wing Aaykar Bhawan Raj Classic Bldg M.K.Road Off. Yari Road, Versova Mumbai-400 020 Andheri(W) Mumbai-400 061 Pan/Gir No.Asgpk3313A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 260Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…that assessee during search and seizure proceedings, had admitted certain undisclosed income, penalty if any should be levied u/s 271AAA and not u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961. The ITAT Ahmadabad Bench, in the case of Dr. Naman A. Shastria vs ACIT (2015) 155 ITD 1003 held that provisions of section 271AAA and 271(1)(c) are mutually exclusive and thus, once penalty initiated u/s 271AAA for specified previous year, there cannot be any occasion to impose penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 11. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the considered v…

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1) , CHENNAI vs. C.V.SUNISH, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1518/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 1518/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 The Assistant Commissioner Of Shri C.V. Sunish, Income Tax, Central Circle 3(1), Vs. C/O Aditya Trading Solutions (P) Ltd., 6Th & 7Th Floor, Npl Towers, L.B. Road, 46, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 041. [Pan:Apfps3125J] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai Dated 15.03.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Penalty Of ₹.22,38,721/- Levied Inadvertently Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T. Banusekar, C.A
Section 129Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…n 271(1)(c) of the Act and converted it into section 271AAA of the Act even on reduced amount cannot be held to be proper or legally justified at all. 6.2 Further, in the case of Dr. Naman A. Shastri v. ACIT [IT(SS)A No. 561 to 563/Ahd/2011 dated 29.09.2015] 155 ITD 1003, the Ahmedabad Benches of the Tribunal has held that penalty for undisclosed income, in respect of the assessment year in question could only be imposed, if at all, only under section 271AAA of the Act and not under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Further, once penalty was initiated under section 271AAA of the Act in assessment order, there could…