ITO v. Sachinam Trust

320 ITR 445High Court2010#17646 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Judgments citing ITO v. Sachinam Trust

Shri Sachin Marotrao Rangari, Rajkot vs. The ACIT Cir-1, Gandhidham

In the result, the grounds raised by the Assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 106/RJT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R

Section 271BSection 44A

…nized body of Accountants, after due deliberation and consideration publishes certain material for its Members, one can rely upon the same. 5.1. The Ld. Counsel further relied upon by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ITO vs. Sachinam Trust [2009] 320 ITR 445 wherein the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court deleted the penalty levied u/s. 271B of the Act is as follows: Section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - For failure to get accounts audited - Where in view of Tax Audit Manual published by Bombay Chartered Accountants' Society, which contained legal opinion of eminent counsel that in case of a perso…

Off Shore India Limited, Karnataka vs. DCIT, Cir-4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 720/KOL/2014[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2017AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 720/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Off-Shore India Limited.............................……………………………………………Appellant (In The Case Of Astor Dealers Pvt. Ltd. – Since Amalgamated) 31, Netaji Subhas Road, 4Th Floor Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aacca5565B] D.C.I.T., Circle-4………………………………………………...........................................Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square Kolkata - 700069 Appearances By: Shri P.J. Bhide, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 11, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 22, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – Xii, Kolkata Dated 14.02.2014 Whereby He Confirmed The Penalty Of Rs. 1,00,000/- Imposed By The Ao Under Section 271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is A Company & As Per Its Memorandum Of Assets, It Is Engaged In The Business Of Investment In Debentures & Shares. Although The Securities Held By It Were Shown At Investment By The Assessee Company In The Balance Sheet, The Profit Or Loss Arising From The Purchase & Sale Of Such Securities Was Treated As Business Income. During The Course Of Assessment

Section 271BSection 44A

…14 Assessment Year: 2003 -04 Off – Shore India Ltd. its case that the penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271B was not sustainable. Reliance was also placed by the assessee inter alia on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case ITO vs Sachinam Trust 320 ITR 445 in support of its case. The Ld. CIT (A) however did not find merit in the submission of the assessee and proceeded to confirm the penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271B for the following reasons given in paragraph no 5.1.3 of his impugned order: “I have carefully considered the submission put forth on behalf of the appellant along with the judgement…

M/S. Koramangala Club vs. The Income Tax Officer

Appeals are allowed accordingly

ITA/173/2009HC Karnataka26 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 260Section 271BSection 44A

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S. SUJATHA ITA Nos.279 & 280/2010 C/W ITA No.173/2009 BETWEEN: M/S. KORAMANGALA CLUB CA 17, 6TH CROSS, 6TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034 REPRESENTED BY ITS HON’BLE SECRETARY MR.C RAJENDRA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O MR.CHINAPPA REDDY (IN ITA 279 & 280/2010) MR.G.RAM PRASAD AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS SON OF MR.G.VEERARAGHAVAIAH. (IN ITA 173/2009) …. APPELLANT (COMMON IN BOTH THE CASES) (BY SMT.JIN…

M/S Koramangala Club vs. The Income Tax Officer

Appeals are allowed accordingly

ITA/279/2010HC Karnataka26 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 260Section 271BSection 44A

DCIT, Circle - 57, Kolkata vs. M/S. Height Insurance Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1939/KOL/2010[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Dr. Adhir Kumar Bar, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194DSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…obligation and consequently, TDS is to be deducted u/s. 194C of the Act i.e. payments to contractors. Ld. Counsel for the assessee in view of the above opinion referred to the case law of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of ITO Vs. Sachinam Trust (2010) 320 ITR 445 (Guj) wherein the Tax Audit Manual published by Bombay Chartered Accountants Society, contained the opinion of eminent counsel that in the case of a person carrying on banking business, the appropriate expression to be considered for deciding the applicability of the provisions of section 44AB of the Act would be on the term “gross receipts” and…