Kasi Consultant Corporation v. DCIT (311 ITR 419)

THAMIRA GREEN FARMS P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ADDL.CIT CORPORATE RANGE 3 , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1845/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1845/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Thamira Green Farm P The Additional Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, No. 1824/4, Gautham Corporate Range -3, Apartments, 1St Floor, Chennai. 18Th Main Road, Anna Nagar West, Chennai – 600 040. [Pan: Aacct-7926-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 269SSection 271Section 271DSection 273B

…igh Court of Madras in the case of Vasan Healthcare P Ltd vs ACIT [2019] 411 ITR 499 (mad). He, had also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of P. Baskar vs CIT [2012] 340 ITR 560 and Kasi Consultant Corporation vs DCIT [2009] 311 ITR 419. :-10-: ITA. No: 1845/Chny/2018 9. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We have also carefully considered relevant case laws relied upon by both the parties. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that, the appellant company has received loans from Shri. T. M…

M/S H. K. INFRAVENTURE PVT. LTD ,VARANSI vs. JOINT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VARANSI

ITA 46/ALLD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Viswakarma,CITD.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271D

…see was registered in favour of the assessee, and hence there was no urgency whatsoever in taking cash loans. The ld. CIT-DR relied upon the judgment and order of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Kasi Consultant Corporation v. DCIT, reported in (2009) 311 ITR 419(Mad. HC). The ld. CIT-DR also relied upon judgment and order of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of P. Baskar v. CIT, reported in (2012) 340 ITR 560(Mad. HC), and it was submitted that no material whatsoever is brought on record by the assessee to show real urgency in receiving cash loans of Rs. 1,10,02,000/- from Mr. Hemant Kumar Sindhi, an…

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

ITA 6124/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Rushabh Mehta, AR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 50Section 68Section 69C

…6 Finance Bill, 1984 (146 (ST) 162) viii. Circular No. 387 dated 06.07.1984 Circular No. 387 dated 06.07.1984 ix. ThenamalChhajjer (96 ITD 210) ThenamalChhajjer (96 ITD 210) x. P. Bhaskar (340 ITR 560) P. Bhaskar (340 ITR 560) xi. Kasi Consultant Corporation (311 ITR 419) Kasi Consultant Corporation (311 ITR 419) 17. Before us, the Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that there was no material before the Ld. Addl./Commissioner of there was no material before the Ld. Addl./Commissioner of there was no material before the Ld. Addl./Commissioner of Income-…

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 (3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

ITA 6123/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Rushabh Mehta, AR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 50Section 68Section 69C

…6 Finance Bill, 1984 (146 (ST) 162) viii. Circular No. 387 dated 06.07.1984 Circular No. 387 dated 06.07.1984 ix. ThenamalChhajjer (96 ITD 210) ThenamalChhajjer (96 ITD 210) x. P. Bhaskar (340 ITR 560) P. Bhaskar (340 ITR 560) xi. Kasi Consultant Corporation (311 ITR 419) Kasi Consultant Corporation (311 ITR 419) 17. Before us, the Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that there was no material before the Ld. Addl./Commissioner of there was no material before the Ld. Addl./Commissioner of there was no material before the Ld. Addl./Commissioner of Income-…

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

…f he has given some false entries in his accounts, he shall not escape by giving false explanation for the same. Similar views have also been expressed in the following cases: 1) Sundarshan Cold Storage (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 188 (MP) 2) Kasi Consultant Corporation 311 ITR 419 (Mad.) 3) R.K. Singhal 221 CTR 412 (Raj.). 4) Bhalotia Eng. Work Ltd. 275 ITR 399 (Jharkhand) 13. In view of the above, the Addl. CIT stated that the assessee had taken cash loan of Rs. 2,75,00,000/- in violation of section 269SS of the IT Act, 1961 and, therefore, the assessee is liable for penalty of 2,75,00,000/- i.e. equal to the amount of L…

SHRI P. SUNDARAMURTHY,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 2730/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2730/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-2010. Shri. P. Sundaramurthy, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of No.19, Mariamman Koil Street, Income Tax, Manjini Nagar, Pondicherry Range, Puducherry 605 003. Pondicherry. [Pan Aasps 2879P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. V.M. Mahidar, IRS, JCIT

Section 133ASection 133A(3)Section 269TSection 271ESection 273B

…how that lender had insisted for repayment of loan in cash and even if the transaction is considered genuine still penalty is exigible, placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kasi Consultant Corporation vs. DCIT, 311 ITR 419 and P. Baskar vs. CIT, 340 ITR 560. Mensrea is not an essential ingredient for levy of penalty. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA Nos.321 to 328/CHNY/2018, fo…

Kasi Consultant Corporation v. DCIT