Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory v. Jt. CIT

77 ITD 478Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2001#10772 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

construction pe penalty under section 271d section 269t section 269s domestic company section 273 section 269ss section 271d section 273b section 48 section 269 child

Judgments citing Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory v. Jt. CIT

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 206/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

…ome modern statutes are regarded as preambles" to these sections. This view was approved by Farewel L.J. in Fletcher vs. Birkenhead Corporation (1907) 1 KB 205". The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory Vs. Jt. CIT (77 ITD 478) at page 486 observed as under: "10. It may not be possible for an assessee to predict with precision the exact requirements of money for discharging its obligations connected to the business, statutory or otherwise. It may not also be possible for it to anticipate the exact dates on which it may be required to discharge such obligations. There ca…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 205/CTK/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

BHALCHANDRA P. DALVI,GHAHTKOPAR, MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 27 (1) (2), VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2492/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalebhalchandra P. Dalvi, Vs. Ito-Ward 27(1)(2), 1, Hemalaya Society, It-Office, Vashi Milind Nagar, Near Railway Station Sungrace English Building, School,Ghatkopar(W), Navimumbai-400705. Mumbai-400084. Pan/Gir No. : Aampd3092P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Dinesh R.Shah & Shri B.R.Vyas.Ar Respondent By : Shri.Ashokkumarambastha,Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/Sec271D & U/Sec250 Of The Act. 1. The Learned Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax 27(1) Erred In Levying Penalty U/S 271D Amounting To Rupees 24,50,000/- Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand As Well As Cit(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Erred In Confirming The Same. Bhalachandra P. Dalvi.Mumbai. 2.1 The Appellant Has Received Rupees 18,50,000/- Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand Cash Against Sale Of Flat & Rs.6,00,000/- Amount Raised From Lenders Which Amount Was Less Than Rupees Twenty Thousand Out Of Rupees Six Lakhs, Rupees Four Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Is Already Taxed As Income & Balance Loans Are Accepted As Genuine & Each Loans Less Than Rs.20,000/- Considering Above Facts & Circumstances No Penalty U/S 271D Can Be Levied & Same Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri. Dinesh R.Shah & ShriFor Respondent: Shri.AshokKumarAmbastha,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Bhalchandra P. Dalvi, Vs. ITO-Ward 27(1)(2), 1, Hemalaya Society, IT-Office, Vashi Milind Nagar, Near Railway Station Sungrace English Building, School,Ghatkopar(W), NaviMumbai-400705. Mumbai-400084. PAN/GIR No. : AAMPD3092P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri. Dinesh R.Shah & Shri B.R.Vyas.AR Respondent by : Shri.AshokKumarAmbastha,Sr.DR Date of Hearing 21.12.2023 Date of Pronouncement 17.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The appeal is file…

JICE ACADEMY FOR EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 704/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Nulvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…rlance. It only represents diversion of funds from one concern to another depending upon the exigencies of the business." 32. The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory vs. Jt. CIT (2001) 72 TTJ (Mumbai) 307 : (2001) 77 ITD 478 (Mumbai), at p. 487, held as follows :- "Quite apart from the question of existence of reasonable cause, we are not sure whether the amounts received by the assessee from VE can be termed as "loans" or "deposits". The words are not defined in the Expln. (iii) below s. 269SS except saying that "loan" or" deposit" means loan or deposit of money. The…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABU LAL DATA, 2015-16

In the result the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 1233/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: S. Naiyer Ali Najmi, CIT

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271D

…de from the assessee-respondent. The provisions under section 269SS are applicable only in case of loan or deposit and do not cover cash advance for purpose of goods in future. Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory vs. Joint Commissioner of Income- tax [2001] 77 ITD 478 (MUM.) (Annexure 17) Moreover, the amounts taken by the assessee in the present case from VE were temporary advances and there was no evidence that there was any 18 ACIT, Alwar vs Shri Babu Lal Data, Alwar stipulation as to the period or any stipulation for interest. It was therefore a matter of grave doubt as to whether the amounts received from…

KARNATAKA AGROCHEMICAL PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-4(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri SreeHariKutsa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 250Section 269TSection 271E

…arlance. It only represents diversion of funds from one concern to another depending upon the exigencies of the business." 32. The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory vs. Jt. CIT (2001) 72 TTJ (Mumbai) 307 : (2001) 77 ITD 478 (Mumbai), at p. 487, held as follows :- "Quite apart from the question of existence of reasonable cause, we are not sure whether the amounts received by the assessee from VE can be termed as "loans" or "deposits". The words are not defined in the Expln. (iii) below s. 269SS except saying that "loan" or" deposit" means loan or deposit of money. The…

AKASH EDUCATION & DEVELOPMENT TRUST,BENGALURU vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE-2, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 737/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Nulvi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271D(2)Section 273B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year: 2016-17 Akash Education & Development Trust, Vs. The Addl. Commissioner No.22nd Ward, Prashanth Nagar, of Income Tax, Devanahalli, Central Range-2, Bengaluru – 562 110. Bangalore. PAN: AACTA 7888E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Rajeev Nulvi, AR Respondent by : Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 16.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 18.04.2022 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member This appeal by th…

IRAPPA REVANSIDDAPPA JALAWADIL ,VIJAYAPURA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIJAYAPURA RANGE , VIJAYAPURA

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

ITA 3342/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaishri Irappa Revansiddappa Jalawadil, H.No.331A, Water Galli, Post Talikoti, Muddebihal Taluk, Vijayapura Dist. ….Appellant. Pan Arxoj 7329M Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vijayapur Range, Vijayapur. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri Chandrashekar, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Kannan Narayan, Jcit (D.R)

For Appellant: Shri Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayan, JCIT (D.R)

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 44A

…no bank account being an agriculturist. The learned Authorised Representative relied on the following decisions of the Tribunal : i) ITA Nos.1108 & 1109/Bang/2009 Dt.31.05.2018 (DCIT Vs. M/s. VSL Steel Ltd.) ii) Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory Vs. JCIT 77 ITD 478 ( Mum-Tribunal) The ld. AR submitted that there was reasonable cause for the assessee to accept the said amount in cash. As seen from the record, these amounts have been accepted by the assessee from 7.1.2011 to 25.02.2011. After that it was refunded back to the assessee by 5.3.2011 as seen from the said bank account which is as follows : 4 Acco…

M/S CHEMMANUR METALS AND ALLOYS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 934/BANG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Suryavamshi, ACIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271D

…he AO. For these reasons, the order of the CIT(A) in sustaining the penalty partly was erroneous. 8. In support of his contentions, the ld. AR relied on the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory v. JCIT, 77 ITD 478 (Mum). He also drew our attention to Audit Page 6 of 7 Report in Form 3CD stating that these are advances received from customers, which is placed at pages 28 of PB. He also furnished copies of confirmation letter from the concerned parties which is placed on record at pages 31 to 33 of assessee’s PB. Therefore, the ld. AR submitted that the amou…

SANJAY BHALOTIA,ROHTAK vs. ADDL. CIT, ROHTAK

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 435/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 271DSection 271E

…ITA No. 435 & 436/Del./2012 6 through banking channel, but only in cash, which would cover the reasonable cause as contemplated under the Act. We can usefully refer the decision rendered in the case of Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factor vs. Dy. CIT (2001) 77 ITD 478 (Mum), wherein it has been held that if assessee was able to lead evidence to show that not only was there reasonable cause for taking money in cash, but amount did not also represent unaccounted monies either of assessee or of person from whom money was taken, it should be sufficient to hold that penalty was not justified. In the instant case, th…