(Mahendra Praksh Sarraf v. DCIT

64 ITD 382Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1998#21197 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Judgments citing (Mahendra Praksh Sarraf v. DCIT

M/S. Setu Ahmednagar, Ahmednagar vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, (TDS), Pune

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

ITA 2466/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 200(3)Section 272(2)(k)Section 272A(2)(k)

…e government in time. Only the quarterly return of tax deducted at source in Form No. 26Q was not filed within time. In this regard we rely upon the judgement of the Hon'ble income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi)('S.MC') in the case of Mehendra Prakash Sarraf, 64 ITD 382 (Delhi). 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the quarterly return within the stipulated period. 3. All the grounds being inter-connected are considered together. 3 4. Before us, Ld.A.R. at the outset submitted that Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex-part…

Seafarer'S Welfare Fund Society, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (TDS) RG 3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4570/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4568, 4569 & 4570/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 To 2010-11 Seafarer’S Welfare Fund The Addl. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ Scoeity, Range-3, Vs. Commerce House,1St Floor, Mumbai Curimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacts 6282J .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri N.J. Jawker ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Kailash Gaikwad

For Appellant: Shri N.J. JawkerFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Gaikwad
Section 272A(2)(K)

…in the account of the Government in time, but Form 26A was not filed, there existed a bonafide belief in the matter of requirement of furnishing Form 26A, so that it is reasonable cause. There is no case to levy penalty (Mahendra Praksh Sarraf Vs DCIT (1998) 64 ITD 382 (Del.). He further submits that considering the facts of the case and decisions cited above and considering the objectives of the charitable trust for welfare of cross section of seafarer, the penalty levied for all these Assessment Years are unjustifiable and requested to delete the same. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently support…

Seafarer'S Welfare Fund Society, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (TDS) RG 3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4569/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4568, 4569 & 4570/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 To 2010-11 Seafarer’S Welfare Fund The Addl. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ Scoeity, Range-3, Vs. Commerce House,1St Floor, Mumbai Curimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacts 6282J .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri N.J. Jawker ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Kailash Gaikwad

For Appellant: Shri N.J. JawkerFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Gaikwad
Section 272A(2)(K)

…in the account of the Government in time, but Form 26A was not filed, there existed a bonafide belief in the matter of requirement of furnishing Form 26A, so that it is reasonable cause. There is no case to levy penalty (Mahendra Praksh Sarraf Vs DCIT (1998) 64 ITD 382 (Del.). He further submits that considering the facts of the case and decisions cited above and considering the objectives of the charitable trust for welfare of cross section of seafarer, the penalty levied for all these Assessment Years are unjustifiable and requested to delete the same. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently support…

Seafarer'S Welfare Fund Society, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (TDS) RG 3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4568/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4568, 4569 & 4570/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 To 2010-11 Seafarer’S Welfare Fund The Addl. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ Scoeity, Range-3, Vs. Commerce House,1St Floor, Mumbai Curimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacts 6282J .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri N.J. Jawker ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Kailash Gaikwad

For Appellant: Shri N.J. JawkerFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Gaikwad
Section 272A(2)(K)

…in the account of the Government in time, but Form 26A was not filed, there existed a bonafide belief in the matter of requirement of furnishing Form 26A, so that it is reasonable cause. There is no case to levy penalty (Mahendra Praksh Sarraf Vs DCIT (1998) 64 ITD 382 (Del.). He further submits that considering the facts of the case and decisions cited above and considering the objectives of the charitable trust for welfare of cross section of seafarer, the penalty levied for all these Assessment Years are unjustifiable and requested to delete the same. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently support…

(Mahendra Praksh Sarraf v. DCIT (64 ITD 382) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax