Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, Circle-3, Pune vs. Gokhale Construction, Erandwana

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

…e date of survey cannot be considered as ‘voluntary’. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT (Appeals) erred in the deleting the penalty without appreciating the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of MAK Data Pvt. Ltd. CIT (2012) 358 ITR 593(SC) wherein surrender of amount after detection by the Assessing Officer in search action was not considered as being voluntary in nature and the Apex Court justified the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(C) of the Act. 4. The appellant prays to be allowed to add, amend, modify, rectify, delete or raise any grounds of appeal during the course of appell…

Praphull Kaluram Shivale, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 12, Pune

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 490/Pun/2019 करिनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Praphull Kaluram Shivale, 234, Balu Shetpabal Road, Vadhu Budruk, Shirur,Pune – 412216 Pan :Bfqps4176B . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 12, Pune . . . . . . . ""थ" / Respondent "ारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri B. C. Malakar Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing :16/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement :26/08/2022 आदेश / Order Per G.D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Appellant Assessee Is Challenged Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 14/02/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which In Turn Dove Out Of Order Of Penalty [For Short “Po”] Of Asstt. Commission Of Income Tax, Circle-12 Pune [For Short “Ao”] Dt.28/06/2018 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 14

…आयकर अपीलीय "ायािधकरण, पुणे "ायपीठ,“बी” ब"च पुणे म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE“B” BENCH,PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 490/PUN/2019 करिनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Praphull Kaluram Shivale, 234, Balu Shetpabal Road, Vadhu Budruk, Shirur,Pune – 412216 PAN :BFQPS4176B . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 12, Pune . . . . . . . ""थ" / Respondent "ारा / Appearances Assessee by : Shri B. C. Malakar Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -9, Pune vs. M/S. East West Developers, Pune

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

…isallowance made by the AO in the computation of total income, there can be no question of any penalty on the income suo motu offered by the assessee in his return of income. 5. The judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MAK Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) does not come to the rescue of the Revenue. The assessee in that case filed his return on 27-10-2004 declaring income of Rs.16.17 lakh. Prior to that, a survey action was taken against the assessee on 16-12-2003. No income was offered during the course of survey and as such nothing was included in the return filed after the date of surve…

Ashok M. Musale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 8, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Shri Ashok M. Musale Vs. Dcit, Circle 8, C/O M/S. Pune Metagraph, Pune G-113, Midc, Bhosari, Pune – 411026 Pan : Aaupm2922P Appellant Respondent

…ng to deemed dividend addition made in quantum proceedings, Mr. Walimbe vehemently 2 Ashok M. Musale supported the same by pleading that this taxpayer had failed to offer any justifiable explanation. He also quoted case law Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) that such a penalty is indeed attracted on account of assessee‟s failure in filing a cogent explanation. 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing arguments and find no merit therein. A perusal of Assessing Officer‟s corresponding penalty show cause notice dated 28.09.2012 suggests that he had nowhere specified as to wh…

Sanjay Manakchand Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.435 & 436/Pun/2016 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA Nos.435 & 436/PUN/2016 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Sanjay Manakchand Kotecha 4, Sagar Society, Vardhaman Nagar, Jalgaon – 425002 PAN : ABIPK9499A .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनधम / V/s. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 1, Nashik ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : None (Shri Bhupendra Shah) Revenue by : Shri M. Jasnani सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date of Hearing : 17-03-2022 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date of Pr…

Sanjay Manakchand Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.435 & 436/Pun/2016 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA Nos.435 & 436/PUN/2016 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Sanjay Manakchand Kotecha 4, Sagar Society, Vardhaman Nagar, Jalgaon – 425002 PAN : ABIPK9499A .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनधम / V/s. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 1, Nashik ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : None (Shri Bhupendra Shah) Revenue by : Shri M. Jasnani सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date of Hearing : 17-03-2022 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date of Pr…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2, Pune vs. Swapnadeep Krushi Paryatan Kendra, Pune

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

…isallowance made by the AO in the computation of total income, there can be no question of any penalty on the income suo motu offered by the assessee in his return of income. 5. The judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MAK Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) does not come to the rescue of the Revenue. The assessee in that case filed his return on 27-10-2004 declaring income of Rs.16.17 lakh. Prior to that, a survey action was taken against the assessee on 16-12- 5 Swapnadeep Krushi Paryatan Kendra 2003. No income was offered during the course of survey and as such nothing was included in th…

Prakash Mithalal Oswal, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 7 (1), Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Prakash Mithalal Oswal, Vs. Ito, Ward-7(1), 164, M.G. Road, Pune Ground Floor, Pune 411 001 Pan : Aabpo7523R Appellant Respondent

…the computation of total income, there can be no question of any penalty on the income suo motu offered by the assessee in his return of income. 4. The ld. DR heavily banked on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MAK Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) for bolstering his submission that the amount surrendered by the assessee also attracts imposition of penalty. The assessee in that 4 Prakash M. Oswal case filed his return on 27-10-2004 declaring income of Rs.16.17 lakh. Prior to that, a survey action was taken against the assessee on 16-12-2003. No income was offered during the course o…

Ashok Vijaykumar Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

…the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel, 278 ITR 454 (All.) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (i) ACIT vs. Gebilal Kanhaialal HUF, 348 ITR 561 (SC) and (ii) MAK Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT, 358 ITR 593 (SC) held that since the assessee did not satisfy in such proceedings as to how an assessee derived undisclosed income and under what head it fell 271AA of the Act vide para 14, 15 and 16 held as under :- “14. In construing Section 271AAA one must not lose sight of its essential purpose which resulted in its enactment. There is a penalty at the r…

Ashok Vijaykumar Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

…the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel, 278 ITR 454 (All.) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (i) ACIT vs. Gebilal Kanhaialal HUF, 348 ITR 561 (SC) and (ii) MAK Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT, 358 ITR 593 (SC) held that since the assessee did not satisfy in such proceedings as to how an assessee derived undisclosed income and under what head it fell 271AA of the Act vide para 14, 15 and 16 held as under :- “14. In construing Section 271AAA one must not lose sight of its essential purpose which resulted in its enactment. There is a penalty at the r…

Ashok Vijaykumar Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

…the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel, 278 ITR 454 (All.) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (i) ACIT vs. Gebilal Kanhaialal HUF, 348 ITR 561 (SC) and (ii) MAK Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT, 358 ITR 593 (SC) held that since the assessee did not satisfy in such proceedings as to how an assessee derived undisclosed income and under what head it fell 271AA of the Act vide para 14, 15 and 16 held as under :- “14. In construing Section 271AAA one must not lose sight of its essential purpose which resulted in its enactment. There is a penalty at the r…