Harigopal Singh v. CIT

258 ITR 85High Court2002#448 most cited

What is Harigopal Singh v. CIT authority for?

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied when an addition to income is made on an estimated basis without concrete evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The provisions of section 271(1)(c) are not attracted to cases where income is assessed on an estimate basis.

203

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Harigopal Singh v. CIT · 258 ITR 85 · section 271(1)(c) · penalty on estimated additions · no penalty for estimated income · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · concrete evidence of concealment · levy of penalty · section 271(1)

Also reported as

125 Taxmann 252

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 145(3)Section 148Section 274Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

penalty u/s 271(1)(c)penalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particularsfurnishing inaccurate particulars of incomeconcealment of incomesection 271(1)levy of penaltysection 274section 271(1)(c)section 271section 27section 147

Judgments citing Harigopal Singh v. CIT

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ecs Limited

ITA - 1003 / 2008HC Delhi05 Feb 2010
Section 271(1)(c)Section 80

…y of penalty and has relied upon the following judgments: - i) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Prem Dass [248 ITR 234 (P & H)]; - Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ajaib Singh & Co. [253 ITR 630 (P&H)]; and - iii) Hargopal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [258 ITR 85 (P&H)]. In the aforesaid cases, it was held that where the assessee's returned his income on estimate basis but the AO as well as the CIT (A) admitted the different estimate, it was a case of difference of opinion and on estimation of disallowance, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be made. No doubt, in those cases where there would be diffe…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ecs Ltd

ITA - 1030 / 2008HC Delhi05 Feb 2010
Section 271(1)(c)Section 80

…s relied upon the following judgments: - i) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Prem Dass. [248 ITR 234 (P & H)]; - ii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ajaib Singh & Co. \[ \text{Z53} \] ITR 630 (P&H)\[ \]; and - iii) Hargopal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [258 ITR 85 (P&H)]. In the aforesaid cases, it was held that where the assessee's returned his income on estimate basis but the AO as well as the CIT (A) admitted the different estimate, it was a case of difference of opinion and on estimation of disallowance, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be made. No doubt, in those cases where there would be diffe…

Ecs Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA - 1248 / 2008HC Delhi26 Oct 2009
Section 271(1)(c)Section 80

…ain levy of penalty and has relied upon the following judgments: i) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Prem Dass [248 ITR 234 (P & H)]; ii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ajaib Singh & Co. [253 ITR 630 (P&H)]; and Hargopal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [258 ITR 85 (P&H)]. In the aforesaid cases, it was held that where the assessee's returned his income on estimate basis but the AO as well as the CIT (A) admitted the different estimate, it was a case of difference of opinion and on estimation of disallowance, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be made. No doubt, in those cases where there would be diffe…