Ld.CIT(A). 7. Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT

187 TTJ 233Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#13649 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Judgments citing Ld.CIT(A). 7. Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT

M.Lakhamsi& Co., Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 17(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4304/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Vajani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kasuri, (Sr. AR)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292B

…never raised before the lower authorities. He further placed reliance on the decision of co- ordinate bench of ITAT,Mumbai wherein it held in the case of Earth moving Equipment Service Corporation vide its order reported in (2017) 166 ITD 113 (Mumbai)/(2017) 187 TTJ 233 (Mumbai Tribunal) that mere non-ticking of the relevant clause in notice would not invalidate the penalty proceedings.The ld.DR submitted that from the quantum order it is seen that the AO clearly initiated the penalty proceedings, after due deliberation, for furnishing of inaccurate particulars which shows due application of mind qua penalty pro…

Mukon Construction Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1152/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Srivashtav,ARFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kasuri, (Sr. AR)

Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292B

…decision of co- ordinate bench of ITAT, Mumbai wherein it held in the case of Earth moving Equipment Service Corporation vide its order reported in (2017) Page 3 ITA No. 1152/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2014-15 Mukon Construction Private Limited 166 ITD 113 (Mumbai)/(2017) 187 TTJ 233 (Mumbai Tribunal) that mere non-ticking of the relevant clause in notice would not invalidate the penalty proceedings.The ld.DR submitted that from the quantum order, it is seen that the AO clearly initiated the penalty proceedings, after due deliberation, for furnishing of inaccurate particulars which shows due application of mind qua penalty pr…

Chiranjeev Kumar Vinayak, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-47(5), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6644/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292BSection 68Section 69C

…the penalty proceedings were rightly initiated in this case and that the penalty was rightly confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A). 7. Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation Vs DCIT [2017] 84 taxmann.com 51 (Mumbai - Trib.)/[2017] 166 ITD 113 (Mumbai - Trib.)/[2017] 187 TTJ 233 (Mumbai - Trib.) Where Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai held as follows: “6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the relevant material on record including cited case laws. So far as the legal grounds are concerned, a perusal of quantum order reveals that the penalty was initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and finally the same was le…

George Kutty, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3788/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] George Kutty, Vs Dcit, C/O-M/S. Oasis Tours India (P.) Circle-13(1), Ltd., C-40, Middle Circle, Dwarka New Delhi. Sadan, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aajpk4005H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Manish Malik, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 276CSection 68

…the penalty proceedings were rightly initiated in this case and that the penalty was rightly confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A). 7. Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation Vs DCIT [2017] 84 taxmann.com 51 (Mumbai - Trib.)/[2017] 166 ITD 113 (Mumbai - Trib.)/[2017] 187 TTJ 233 (Mumbai - Trib.) where Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai held as follows: "6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the relevant material on record including cited case laws. So far as the legal grounds are concerned, a perusal of quantum order reveals that the penalty was initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and finally the same was le…

M/S Hindon Forge (P) Ltd., Meerut vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 4738/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. C.P. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 271(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-I”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 4738/DEL/2016 A.Y. : 2003-04 HINDON FORGE (P) LTD., DCIT,CIRCLE-1, GHAZIABAD C/O MALIK & CO., VS. HAPUR CHUNGI, CGO 1ST 305/7, THAPAR NAGAR, COMPLEX, FLOOR, MEERUT-250001 CENTRAL REVENUE (PAN: AAACH4606E) BUILDING, GHAZIABAD, UP (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Sanjay Malik, Advocate Department by : Sh. C.P. Singh, Sr. DR. ORDER Assessee has filed the present appeal against the Order dated 06.6.2016 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad pertaining t…

Oriental Structural Engineers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3116/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…012] 138 ITD 189 (Delhi)/[2012] 150 TTJ 195 (Delhi) vi. Hybrid Rice International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (ITA No. 285/2007) vii. Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation Vs. DCIT {2017} 84 Taxmann.com 51 (Mumbai – Trib.)/[2017] 166 ITD 113 (Mumbai – Trib.)/[2017] 187 TTJ 233 (Mumbai-Trib.) viii. DCIT Vs. Shah Rukh Khan [2018] 93 taxmann.com 320 (Mumbai- Trib.) ix. Dhanraj Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, ITA Nos. 3830 & 3833/Mum./2009 5. We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. In the instant case, the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the penalty following his own finding in assessment year 2007…

Sandeep Bhimrao Lad, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle-3, Thane

ITA 1620/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1620/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, DR

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 271Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1620/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) DCIT Circle – 3, Sandeep Bhimrao Lad, Room No. 2, 6th floor, Prop-M/s Sai Venkatesh Ashar IT Park, Road no. बिधम/ Construction, Room No. 16Z, Wagle Industrial 17, Jeevan Kamal CHS, Vs. Estate, Thane, Kopri Colony, Pin 400 604 Mumbai- 400 603. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. ACCPL9583H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1617, 1618 & 1619/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 t…