Kanboy Software India(P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

31 SOT 153Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#5865 most cited
20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 10BSection 14ASection 274Section 276-C

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularssection 271(1)section 271section 271(1)(c)section 27section 14section 143(3)indiabusinessperson

Judgments citing Kanboy Software India(P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

THE E & NF RAILWAY CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 37, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 709/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, The E&Nf Railway Co- Circle-37, Operative Bank Ltd. 3, Govt. Place (West), 34A & B, Sashi Bhusan Vs. Dey Street, Room No.13, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 012 Kolkata-700 001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaae3431A Assessee By : Shri N.C. Mondal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Bonnine Debbarma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri N.C. Mondal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Bonnine Debbarma, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ns including that of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC) and that of the co-ordinate Bench, Pune in the The E & NF Railway Co-operative Bank Ltd; A.Y. 2013-14 case of Kanbay Software vs. DCIT [2009] 31 SOT 153 (Pune) dated 28-04-2009 and also of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shahabad Co-Op. Sugar Mills Ltd. [2010] 322ITR73 (Punjab & Haryana), claimed that the ratio laid down in the said decisions are applicable on the facts of the case of the assessee and the alleged penalty has been wrongly levied for inaccurate computation of in…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. MANEESH PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 964/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Maneesh Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Tax, Vs. 29-33, Ancillary Industrial Central Circle – 7(1), Plots, Near M Ward, Mumbai Govandi, Mumbai – 400 043 (Pan : Aaacm3635Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Jaypraksh Bairagra, Ca Revenue : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Jaypraksh Bairagra, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT, DR
Section 10BSection 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…naccurate particulars of income by the ld. Assessing Officer. 7.2. The expression ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income’ has been compendiously dealt by the coordinate bench of ITAT Pune in the case of Kanbay Software India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2009] 31 SOT 153 (Pune) while dealing with similar issue of penalty on similar set of facts relating to claim u/s 10A of the Act. Para 61 of the said order is extracted below: “The expression 'furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income' has also not been defined in the Act. The expression 'inaccurate' refers to 'not in conformity with the fact or truth' and th…

MAHAONLINE LIMITED,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEAL) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4064/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Manish KantFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ails/information of the income and not to subjective areas such as taxability thereof. 4 Mahaonline Ltd., AY 2012-13 5. Ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT Pune in the case of Kanbay Software India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 31 SOT 153, wherein it was observed as under: “The details or information about income deal with the factual details of income and this cannot be extended to areas which are subjective such as the status of taxability of an income, admissibility of a deduction and interpretation of law. The furnishing of inaccurate information does relate to furnishing of fa…

VISION JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 530/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature….” 1.20. The proper analysis of the Dharmendra Textile Judgment has been done by the Hon’ble ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Kanbay Software India (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2009] 31 SOT 153 (PUNE). The relevant extracts are reproduced below for proper appreciation of the position even post Dharmendra Textile. Kanbay Software India (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2009] 31 SOT 153 (PUNE):- “..The views expressed by Their Lordships in Dharamendra Textile Processors’ case (supra) cannot be viewed as an authority for the proposition that a penalty un…

VYANJAN HOTEL P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 2(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7445/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon'Blem/S Vyanjan Hotels Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer – 2(3)(4) Unit No.4, Peninsula Chambers Room No. 555 Peninsula Corporate Park Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road G.K. Marg, Lower Parel (W) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aabcv7944C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora Shri Nikhil Tiwari Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Ojha

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Ojha
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…r interest payable by the appellant. It is thus distinct and separate from the tax payable. Penalty proceedings are also distinct and separate from assessment proceedings [CIT Vs. Dharam Chand L. Shah, 204 ITR 462 (Bom), Kanbay Software India Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 31 SOT 153 (Pune)]. It is well settled that the provisions dealing with penalty should be strictly construed. It is to be construed within the terms and language of the particular section. Findings in the assessment proceedings for determining or computing tax cannot be said to be conclusive for the purpose of levy of penalty. Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) is levied…

PUNEET SALUJA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3497/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)

…le in the case of the appellant. With the insertion of Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) the onus is now on the assessee to establish his innocence and righteous conduct. It is held in the case of Kanbay Software India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT Circle 8, Pune (2009) 31 SOT 153 that, even when the liability under section 271(1)(c) is viewed as a civil liability, while the onus is certainly not on the tax authorities to establish mens rea of the assessee, the explanation of the assessee is still to be examined by the adjudicating authority on its own merits. Considering this ratio, in the instant case, it is established b…

ASST CIT 33(1), MUMBAI vs. AMIT P. PANDYA, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2054/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Sagar-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar V.–Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

…e fact that the Ld. CIT(A), has confirmed the addition made by the AO in quantum appeal. 2. On facts and in circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying upon the case of Kanabay Software India (P) Ltd. Vs. DC1T Circle 8, Pune (2009) 31 SOT 153, Pune, 1TAT Bench and Evergreen Investment Services (P) Ltd. of the ITAT Mumbai, which do not squarely apply to the present case. 3. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 2. Facts leading to the dispute are that the assessee, a resident individual, was a…

DCIT 10(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MANZ RETAIL P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 5766/MUM/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5766/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) बिधम/ Dcit-10(2)(2) M/S. Manz Retail Private Room No. 216-A, Aayakar Limited, Knowledge House, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Off. Jogeshwari Vikhroli Mumbai-400020. Link Road, Shyam Nagar, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai- 400060 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccm1978J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Dinkle Hariya (Ar) Revenue By: Shri T. A. Khan (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22.03.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 11.09.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2004-05 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Ordered To Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya (AR)For Respondent: Shri T. A. Khan (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271USection 271U(1)(c)

…of shares/ mutual funds, while the same was eventually assessed as Income from Business and penalty proceedings under section 271(l)(c) of the Act were initiated. 4.3.10 In the case of Kanbay Software India (P) ltd vs. DCIT, Circle-S, Pune [2Qfl9J reported in 31 SOT 153, the Ld. Appellate Tribunal, Pune, considered the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of Indians. Dharmendra Textiles Processors [20081 reported in 306 JTR ITA. No.5766/M/2015 A.Y. 2004-05 227 and held that admission or refection of a claim is a subjective exercise and had nothing to do with the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of…

HARISH NARINDER SALVE,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 100/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: SH. SACHIT JOLLY, ADVFor Respondent: SH. ARUN KUMAR YADAV, SR. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 100/Del/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 HARISH NARINDER SALVE, VS. ACIT, CIRCLE 37(1), 6E & 6F, BHAGWAN DASS ROAD, ROOM NO. 2005, NEW DELHI – 11 0001 E-2, CIVIC CENTER, (PAN: AHFPS7386B) JL NEHRU MARG, NEW DELHI - 110002 (RESPONDENT) (ASSESSEE) Assessee by: SH. SACHIT JOLLY, ADV. Revenue by:SH. ARUN KUMAR YADAV, SR. DR ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 07.10.2014 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXVIII, New Delhi re…

VIKRAM SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 143/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature….” 13. The proper analysis of the Dharmendra Textile Judgment has been done by the Hon’ble ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Kanbay Software India (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2009] 31 SOT 153 (PUNE). The ITA No.143/JP/2016_ 14 Shri Vikram Singh Vs. DCIT, Circle-3, Jaipur relevant extracts are reproduced below for proper appreciation of the position: “..The views expressed by Their Lordships in Daramendra Textile Processors’ case (supra) cannot be viewed as an authority for the proposition that a penalty under section 271(1)(c) is an…

ACIT -33(1), MUMBAI vs. AMIT P. PANDVA, MUMBAI

ITA 3078/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Mishra-Sr.-DR
Section 143Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “अई मुंबई अई अई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ अई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“I”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अमरजीत "सह, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./3078/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Asstt. CIT-33(1) Shri Amit P. Pandya Room No.308, 3rd Floor, B/101,, 1st Floor, Shyamkunj, Poisar Bldg. No. C-11, Pratyakshakar Bhavan Vs. Gymkhana Road, Mahavir Nagar, Bandra Kurla Complex,…

GOLANI BROTHERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 4596/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…eated as situation in which any income was concealed by the assessee. The precise observation of the tribunal was as under:- 37.We are also supported by the order of the coordinate bench of Pune in the case of Kanboy Software India(P) Ltd., vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 31 SOT 153 (Pune), it was held, “… it is not for AO to ponder over what should have happened in ideal circumstances and reject explanation but he is to consider explanation objectively and unless he finds some against human probabilities or unless there are any real inconsistencies or factual errors in such an explanation, AO ought to accept the same”. In th…

GOLANI BROTHERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 4595/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…eated as situation in which any income was concealed by the assessee. The precise observation of the tribunal was as under:- 37.We are also supported by the order of the coordinate bench of Pune in the case of Kanboy Software India(P) Ltd., vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 31 SOT 153 (Pune), it was held, “… it is not for AO to ponder over what should have happened in ideal circumstances and reject explanation but he is to consider explanation objectively and unless he finds some against human probabilities or unless there are any real inconsistencies or factual errors in such an explanation, AO ought to accept the same”. In th…

GOLANI BROTHERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 4594/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…eated as situation in which any income was concealed by the assessee. The precise observation of the tribunal was as under:- 37.We are also supported by the order of the coordinate bench of Pune in the case of Kanboy Software India(P) Ltd., vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 31 SOT 153 (Pune), it was held, “… it is not for AO to ponder over what should have happened in ideal circumstances and reject explanation but he is to consider explanation objectively and unless he finds some against human probabilities or unless there are any real inconsistencies or factual errors in such an explanation, AO ought to accept the same”. In th…

GOLANI BROTHERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 4593/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…eated as situation in which any income was concealed by the assessee. The precise observation of the tribunal was as under:- 37.We are also supported by the order of the coordinate bench of Pune in the case of Kanboy Software India(P) Ltd., vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 31 SOT 153 (Pune), it was held, “… it is not for AO to ponder over what should have happened in ideal circumstances and reject explanation but he is to consider explanation objectively and unless he finds some against human probabilities or unless there are any real inconsistencies or factual errors in such an explanation, AO ought to accept the same”. In th…

SKF INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 4(3)4, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 7092/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.7092/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2002-03 M/S. Skf India Ltd., The Acit-4(3), बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Skf Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bearings India Ltd) Mumbai-400 020 Mahatama Gandhi Memorial Bldg., Netaji Subhash Road, Mumbai-400 002 Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.3558/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2005-06 M/S. Skf India Ltd., The Acit-4(3), बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Skf Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bearings India Ltd) Mumbai-400 020 Mahatama Gandhi Memorial Bldg., Netaji Subhash Road, Mumbai-400 002 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.7093/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05 M/S. Skf India Ltd., The Acit-4(3), बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Skf Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bearings India Ltd) Mumbai-400 020 Mahatama Gandhi Memorial Bldg., Netaji Subhash Road, Mumbai-400 002 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.6989/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Milin Thakore
Section 112(1)(b)Section 2Section 271(1)(c)Section 48Section 50Section 50C

…d. (322 ITR 158) wherein it was held that a claim which may not be sustainable in law does not tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Placing reliance on the decision of the Pune Bench in the case of Kanbay Software India Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (31 SOT 153) it was contended that raising a legal claim even if it is ultimately found to be legally unacceptable by the tax authorities, cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, the assessee contended that it has neither concealed particulars of income nor it has furnished inaccurate particulars of such income and hence no pe…

SKF INIDA LTD( SINCE MAY 19 2004 NAME HAS BEEN CHANGED FROM SKF BEARING INDIA LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 4(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3558/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.7092/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2002-03 M/S. Skf India Ltd., The Acit-4(3), बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Skf Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bearings India Ltd) Mumbai-400 020 Mahatama Gandhi Memorial Bldg., Netaji Subhash Road, Mumbai-400 002 Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.3558/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2005-06 M/S. Skf India Ltd., The Acit-4(3), बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Skf Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bearings India Ltd) Mumbai-400 020 Mahatama Gandhi Memorial Bldg., Netaji Subhash Road, Mumbai-400 002 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.7093/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05 M/S. Skf India Ltd., The Acit-4(3), बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Skf Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bearings India Ltd) Mumbai-400 020 Mahatama Gandhi Memorial Bldg., Netaji Subhash Road, Mumbai-400 002 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.6989/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Milin Thakore
Section 112(1)(b)Section 2Section 271(1)(c)Section 48Section 50Section 50C

…d. (322 ITR 158) wherein it was held that a claim which may not be sustainable in law does not tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Placing reliance on the decision of the Pune Bench in the case of Kanbay Software India Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (31 SOT 153) it was contended that raising a legal claim even if it is ultimately found to be legally unacceptable by the tax authorities, cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, the assessee contended that it has neither concealed particulars of income nor it has furnished inaccurate particulars of such income and hence no pe…

AIRLINE FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES (INDIA) LTD ( AMALGAMATED WITH TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2549/MUM/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2001-02
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri B.D.Naik
Section 10ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80H

…. 1396 of20 13) (Bombay HC) iv) Sesa Resources Limited (38 Taxmann 224) (Bombay High Court) v) Nalin P. Shah - HUF (40 Taxmann 86) (Bombay HC) vi) Ultimate Fashion Maker Limited (20 I 0- TIOL-116) (Delhi High Court) vii) Kanbay Software India Private Limited (31 SOT 153) (Pune Tribunal) viii)Oscar Udyog Limited (42 Taxmann 258) (Karnataka High Court) ix) Mansukh Dyeing & Printing Mills (219 Taxmann 91) (Bombay HC) x) Equest India (P.) Limited (41 SOT 225) (Mumbai Tribunal) xi) Hindalco Industries Limited (41 SOT 254) (Mumbai Tribunal) xii) Industrial Development Bank of India Limited (42 SOT 325) xiii) Legrand In…

AIRLINE FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES (INDIA) LTD ( AMALGAMATED WITH TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2547/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri B.D.Naik
Section 10ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80H

…. 1396 of20 13) (Bombay HC) iv) Sesa Resources Limited (38 Taxmann 224) (Bombay High Court) v) Nalin P. Shah - HUF (40 Taxmann 86) (Bombay HC) vi) Ultimate Fashion Maker Limited (20 I 0- TIOL-116) (Delhi High Court) vii) Kanbay Software India Private Limited (31 SOT 153) (Pune Tribunal) viii)Oscar Udyog Limited (42 Taxmann 258) (Karnataka High Court) ix) Mansukh Dyeing & Printing Mills (219 Taxmann 91) (Bombay HC) x) Equest India (P.) Limited (41 SOT 225) (Mumbai Tribunal) xi) Hindalco Industries Limited (41 SOT 254) (Mumbai Tribunal) xii) Industrial Development Bank of India Limited (42 SOT 325) xiii) Legrand In…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S REACH INTERACTIVE COM. PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3469/DEL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg:Asstt. Yr: 2001-02 Dcit, Circle 15(1), Vs. Reach Interactive Com. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 7, Local Shopping Centre, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcr 9137 R ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By : Ms. Kesong Y. Sherpa Sr. Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 05/05/2016. Date Of Order : 10/05/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Ms. Kesong Y. Sherpa Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…tails and specific discussion in the assessment order. Mere confirmation of addition by the CIT(A) cannot be a ground for levy of penalty u/s 271 (1 )(c). In this context, I find that the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune in the case of Kanbay Software India (P) Ltd. (2009) 31 SOT 153 after considering the decisions of the Apex Court in Dharmendra Textile Processors 295 ITR 244 (SC) and Dilip N. Shroff 291 ITR 519 (SC) has inter alia held as under: "Whether details or information about income deal with factual details of income and this cannot be extended to areas which are subjective , such as status of taxability of an income…