HCIL Arsspl Triveni (JV) v. ACIT ( (274 ITR 603)

BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-8(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1608/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Respondent: Appellant by Shri Nikhil Mutha

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 270ASection 270A(9)

…the ld. AR argued that, in any case, a mistake of a professional cannot invite an assessee with the levy of penalty and for which, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Deep Tools Pvt. Ltd as reported in 274 ITR 603. Further, the ld AR also argued that in the penalty show cause notice issued u/s 270A read with Section 274 of the Act, the ld AO did not mention the specific charge of offence committed by the assessee i.e. the AO did not mention whether the assessee has either underreported his income or misreported his income or underreported in consequence of…

SMS CONCAST AG,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3(1)(2) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1444/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Deval, Sr. DR

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80GSection 80HSection 80I

…ual Co: 288 ITR 570 7. Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd: 327 ITR 543 8. Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dharampal Premchand Ltd: 329 ITR 572 9. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Deep Tools (P) Ltd: 274 ITR 603 10. Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Dhanabal: 309 ITR 268 11. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sidhartha Enterprises: 322 ITR 80 12. Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Deban International Ltd.: 2 taxmann.com 140 (Delhi) 13. Sanghi vs. ACIT: 125 ITR 184 Copy of decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case…

ORANGE CITY CREDIT CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD.,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 19/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 019/Nag/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Orange City Credit Co-Op. Society Ltd. Anand Plaza-2, Hudkeshwar Road, Raja Peth Bus Stop, Nagpur-440034. Pan: Aaaao2933P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-4(4), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 26/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By This Appeal The Assessee Challenges The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1047262637(1) Dt. 14/11/2022 Of The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Confirmed The Order Levying Penalty Passed U/S 270A Of The Act By The National Faceless Assessment Centre [‘Neac’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 246A(1)(aa)Section 250Section 270ASection 274(1)

…remained unshaken by any adverse findings. For the reasons in our considered view levy of penalty in the instant case was unwarranted. This view also finds support in the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision in ‘CIT Vs. Deep Tools Pvt. Ltd’ [2005, 274 ITR 603], wherein it was held that the assessee cannot be made liable for penal action against the bonafied mistake committed by a its professionals. 4. In addition to above, it also noticed that, in the penalty SCN issued u/s 270A r.w.s. 274 of the Act the Ld. AO did fail to make mention of specific charge of offence committed by the assessee i.e. the…

JAYPEE CEMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,NOIDA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 5(1)(1), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and stay application of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1070/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. Jaypee Cement Vs. Acit, Corporation Ltd, Circle-5(1)(1), Sector-128, Gautam Noida Budh Nagar, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacz2168D

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT DR

Section 143(1)Section 270ASection 32A

…, a mistake of a professional cannot invite an assessee with the levy of penalty and for which, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Deep M/s. Jaypee Cement Corporation Ltd Tools Pvt. Ltd as reported in 274 ITR 603. Further, the ld AR also argued that in the penalty show cause notice issued u/s 270A read with Section 274 of the Act, the ld AO did not mention the specific charge of offence committed by the assessee i.e. the AO did not mention whether the assessee has either underreported his income or misreported his income or underreported in consequence of…

HARI DUTT SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-49(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5884/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh.K.N.Charyassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 271Section 80

…assessment years from the initial assessment year the error has crept for which it cannot be said that the assessee has willfully and intentionally claimed the deduction. 19. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case Deep Tools Pvt. Ltd. reported in 274 ITR 603 has held :- “There is nothing to show that mistake by the chartered accountant was not bona fide and mere fact that certificate issued by the chartered accountant was not in accordance with s. 80HHC (4), was not enough to hold that the mistake was not bona fide. At any rate, as far as the assessee is concerned, no mala fides can be attributed to…

SHIVGANGA COLD STORAGE PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4,, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1498/AHD/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1498/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shivganga Cold Storage Ito बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Ward-4 Vs. Block No. 530, Vill: Sampa Gandhinagar Dehgam – Modasa Highway, Dehgam, Dist: Gandhinagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aan Cs2 086 A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Rupesh R. Shah, Ar Lalit P. Jain, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 03/01/2019 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 22/03/2019 Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Mahavir Prasad - Jm: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Appeal No. Cit(A)-3/Gnr/171/2015-16 Dated 13.05.2016 Arising From Out Of Penalty Order Dated 28.08.2015 For Confirming The Penalty U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Rupesh R. Shah, AR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…claim of deduction on the ground that the assessee filed claim on the basis of incorrect advise given by his Chartered Accountant. Similar view was expressed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Deep Tours Private Limited [(2005) 274 ITR 603 (P&H)]. 14. The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Teksons Cooling Systems Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 7128/Mum/06 in which the Tribunal vide its order dated 24.03.2009 deleted the penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) on account of reduction in the claim of deduction u/s. 80-IA which was based on the report of the Auditor. 15. Further…