Harshad Shantilal Mehta v. Custodian & Ors.

231 ITR 871Supreme Court of India1998#2744 most cited

What is Harshad Shantilal Mehta v. Custodian & Ors. authority for?

The definition of 'tax' under the Income Tax Act does not include interest, penalties, or fees, as these are considered separate concepts under the law. The case supports the distinction between tax and other levies.

43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Harshad Shantilal Mehta · definition of tax · interest · penalty · fees · separate concepts · Income Tax Act · section 115WA · tax vs interest

Sections most often in play

Section 156Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 119Section 143(1A)Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(1A)

Issues it is cited on

section 115wasection 234e(1)section 143(1a)section 285section 117section 215section 139(9)section 2(43)interest under section 201(1a)tax collected at sourcesection 200a(1)(c)section 120

Judgments citing Harshad Shantilal Mehta v. Custodian & Ors.

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT LTD,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 480/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. ,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 479/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12\non Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. ,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 478/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12\non Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 477/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages\n4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11\nand 12 on Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 476/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2377/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages\n4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11\nand 12 on Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, CPC TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2368/PUN/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11\nand 12 on Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2367/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages\n4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11\nand 12 on Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2366/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2365/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages\n4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11\nand 12 on Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2364/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2362/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2361/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2360/PUN/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2359/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

…”. Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This definition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax. They are separate concepts under the law. 3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of: a. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on Page 16); b. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages 4 and 5); and Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan c. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11 and 12 on Page 21 and 22). These cases have been annexed in the compi…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2357/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages\n4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11\nand 12 on Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

ITA 2356/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

…Thus, the definition of tax is very clear and unambiguous. This\ndefinition does not include any interest/penalty/fees to mean as tax.\nThey are separate concepts under the law.\n3.2 Reliance is placed on the decisions of:\na. Harshad Shantilal Mehta – (1998) 231 ITR 871 (SC) – (2ndPara on\nPage 16);\nb. Oryx Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd – [Income Tax Appeal No. 1\nof 2015 – Bom HC) – (Para 18, 19 and 21 on Pages\n4 and 5); and\nc. Dinesh T Tailor – [2010-TIOL-311-HC-MUM-IT] – (Para 11\nand 12 on Page 21 and 22).\nThese cases have been annexed in the compilation of cases already\npresented before the bench. The…

EXPAT ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 34/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, D.R
Section 143Section 250

…case with penalty and interest under the Income-tax Act. Tax, penalty and interest are different concepts under the Income-tax Act. The definition of "tax" under section 2(43) does not include penalty or interest. Similarly, under section 156, it is 2 (1998) 231 ITR 871. provided that when any tax, interest, penalty, fine or any of other sum is payable in consequence of any order passed under this Act, the Assessing Officer shall serve upon the assessee a notice of demand as prescribed. The provisions for imposition of penalty and interest are distinct from the provisions for imposition of tax." 10. The decision…

SH. NAWAL KISHORE DANGAYACH,A-34-A, RAM NAGAR, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 304/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary ( Addl. CIT) a
Section 14ASection 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 304/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 cuke Sh. Nawal Kishore Dangayach ACIT, A-34-A, Ram Nagar, Shastri Vs. Circle-4, Jaipur. Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABXPD 6074 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Reve…

EXPAT ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1139/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, JCIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 250Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, AM ITA No.1139/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/s.Expat Engineering India Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner No.1, 3rd Floor, A-Wing of Income-tax, Circle 2(1)(2) v. Carlton Towers, HAL 2nd Stage Bangalore. Old Airport Road Bangalore – 560 008. PAN : AABCE9003D. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Ravishankar S.V., Advocate Respondent by : Sri.Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, JCIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 30.03.2023 Date of Hearing : 30.03.2023 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : This…

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3

Harshad Shantilal Mehta v. Custodian & Ors. (231 ITR 871) — Cited in 43 Judgments | BharatTax