Madhya Pradesh in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chandra Mittal

241 ITR 124High Court2000#1264 most cited

What is Madhya Pradesh in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chandra Mittal authority for?

A penalty for concealment of income cannot be levied if an assessee files a revised return to buy peace and avoid litigation, and the revenue accepts this without objection.

89

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Mittal · 241 ITR 124 · section 271(1)(c) · concealment of income · revised return · buy peace · avoid litigation · bona fide explanation · penalty cancellation

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 132Section 153ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 234BSection 69Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 90(3)section 65(b)section 270a(2)(a)section 194ldsection 9(i)(vii)section 9(i)section 194lsection 65b(4)section 163section 276section 270a(2)section 270a(6)

Judgments citing Madhya Pradesh in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chandra Mittal

ITO 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Diwa Exports, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6140/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey() & Shri N.K. Pradhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Amrita SinghFor Respondent: Shri. Ketan L. Vajani
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 69C

…fore, the AO imposed a minimum penalty of Rs. 38,62,500/- for the AY 2010-11 and Rs. 43,26,000/- for the AY 2011-12. Assessee challenged the penalty orders before CIT(A). 2.3 The ld. CIT(A) relied on the judgment in the case of Suresh Chandra Mittal (2000) 241 ITR 124 (MP), wherein it has been held that in the case of additional ITA No. 6140 & 6141/MUM/2014 4 income offered to buy peace and avoid litigation, no penalty could be levied for concealment. The said judgment was later upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 251 ITR 9(SC). He also relied upon the decision in the case of CIT vs. Careers Education a…

Karamjit Singh Dhanjal, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Smt. Diva Singh & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. V.R. Sachdev, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT/DR
Section 143(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

…higher income having been subsequently declared. The Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT v. Suresh Chandra Mittal, [2001] 251 ITR 9/119 Taxman 433, upheld the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Mittal [2000] 241 ITR 124, where in similar circumstances it was held that the initial burden lies on the revenue to establish that the assessee had concealed the income had furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. The burden shifts to the assessee only if he fails to offer any explanation for the undisclosed income or offers an explanation which is found to be fa…

ACIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Quantum Land & Housing (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4251/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. N.C. Swain, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ved Jain, Advocate &
Section 133ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)

…roving concealment and had simply rested its conclusion on the act of voluntary surrender done by the assessee in good faith, and that penalty could not be levied. On a reference, the High Court held that no penalty could be levied for concealment (see (2000) 241 ITR 124). The Department preferred appeals to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals holding that no interference with the order of the High Court was called for.” 12. The ratio of judgement cited as CIT vs Harish Talwar (supra) and CIT Vs SAS Pharmaceuticals (supra) delivered by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court is that, “to proceed…

ACIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai vs. Jatin J.Shah, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2725/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Ms.Vasanti B. Patel, &For Respondent: Shri Shrikant Namdeo
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ntention of the appellant is rejected. 1.15 The appellant further submitted that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sureshchandra Mittal 251 ITR 9, affirmed the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court reported In 241 ITR 124 (MP) and held that where the additional income was offered to buy peace and avoid litigation and returns 'were accepted and assessment completed it could not be said that there was concealment of income. The assessee has filed returns for the relevant assessment year. Latter action u/s. 132 was taken against the assessee which led to re- opening…

ACIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai vs. Jay Fab, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2724/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Ms.Vasanti B. Patel, &For Respondent: Shri Shrikant Namdeo
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ntention of the appellant is rejected. 1.15 The appellant further submitted that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sureshchandra Mittal 251 ITR 9, affirmed the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court reported In 241 ITR 124 (MP) and held that where the additional income was offered to buy peace and avoid litigation and returns 'were accepted and assessment completed it could not be said that there was concealment of income. The assessee has filed returns for the relevant assessment year. Latter action u/s. 132 was taken against the assessee which led to re- opening…

ACIT CC 34, Mumbai vs. Jay Fab, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3104/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Ms.Vasanti B. Patel, &For Respondent: Shri Shrikant Namdeo
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ntention of the appellant is rejected. 1.15 The appellant further submitted that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sureshchandra Mittal 251 ITR 9, affirmed the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court reported In 241 ITR 124 (MP) and held that where the additional income was offered to buy peace and avoid litigation and returns 'were accepted and assessment completed it could not be said that there was concealment of income. The assessee has filed returns for the relevant assessment year. Latter action u/s. 132 was taken against the assessee which led to re- opening…

ACIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Crazy Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4250/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Kesang Y. Shirpa, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Goel, CA
Section 133Section 153CSection 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…roving concealment and had simply rested its conclusion on the act of voluntary surrender done by the assessee in good faith, and that penalty could not be levied. On a reference, the High Court held that no penalty could be levied for concealment (see (2000) 241 ITR 124). The Department preferred appeals to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals holding that no interference with the order of the High Court was called for.” 12. The ratio of judgement cited as CIT vs Harish Talwar (supra) and CIT Vs SAS Pharmaceuticals (supra) delivered by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court is that, “to proceed…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri.H.D.Prakash

Appeal stands dismissed as no

ITA/311/2009HC Karnataka15 Jun 2015

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

Section 260Section 271

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2015 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR ITA NO.311/2009 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX NO.55/1, SHILPASHREE, VIDYARANYA COMPLEX, VISHVESHWARANAGAR, MYSORE- 570 008 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-I, HASSAN. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, STANDING COUNSEL) AND: SRI.H.D.PRAKASH SREE TRADERS, B.M.ROAD, HASSAN. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.A.SHANKAR, ADVOCATE) 2 THIS APPEAL IS…

Chennakesava Pharmaceuticals Vijayawada vs. The Comi.of Incometax Vij

In the result, all the appeals are allowed setting aside the common

ITTA/31/2000HC Telangana27 Aug 2012

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

For Appellant: :Sri AV KrishnaFor Respondent: Sri J.V.Prasad
Section 133Section 143Section 260Section 271

…0) 335TR 259 (Delhi) 3 (2008) 300 ITR 40 (AP) 4 (2003) 263 ITR 484 (P & H) 5 (2005) 277 ITR 337 (Delhi) 6 (2000) 246 ITR 568 (Delhi) 7 (2000) 246 ITR 571 (Delhi) 8 (2009) 309 ITR 143 (Delhi) (FB) 9 (2008) 307 ITR 147 (Delhi) 10 (2007) 291 ITR 519(SC) 11 (2000)241 ITR 124 (MP) 12(2001)251 ITR 009 (SC) 13(2010)291ITR 519 (SC) 14AIR 1973 S.C. 22 15(2008)306 ITR 277 (SC) HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO I.T.T.A.Nos.29, 31 & 33 of 2000 COMMON JUDGMENT (per Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S.Ramachandra Rao): I.T.T.A.Nos.29, 33 and 31 of 2000 are filed under section 260…