Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT

434 ITR 1High Court2021#82 most cited

What is Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT authority for?

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify the exact charge by not striking off the irrelevant limb (concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income). Such an omnibus or vague notice renders the penalty proceedings bad in law, and any penalty imposed on its basis is liable to be quashed.

672

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274 · defective penalty notice · non-striking off irrelevant limb · non-specification of charge · omnibus notice · vagueness · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · penalty quashed

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 153ASection 250Section 147Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 270a(8)section 271(l)record datesection 271(l)(c)section 274section 270a(9)furnishing inaccurate particularsfurnishing inaccurate particulars of incomeconcealment of incomenon-application of mindpenalty proceedings initiatedpenalty u/s 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT

M/S Melting Point, Kolhapur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Kolhapur

Appeal is allowed on above terms

ITA 2118/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr.Dipak P.Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2118/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Melting Point, The Assistant Commissioner Of Gat No.652, A/P Kushire, Vs Income Tax, Taluka Panhala, District: C Kolhapur. .0Ircle-1, Kolhapur. Pan: Aacfm 2391 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 10/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 16/06/2022 आदेश / Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y.2011-12 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Kolhapur’S Order Dated 01.11.2019 In Appeal No.Kop/433/2014-15 In Proceedings U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, In Short “The Act”.

Section 271(1)(c)

…or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This clinching fact has gone unrebutted from the revenue’s side. 3. Faced with the situation, we quote hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s recent Full Bench decision in Mohd. Farhan A Shaikh vs. ACIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bom) that such a failure in Assessing Officer’s part in not specifying the corresponding limb in the penalty show cause notice itself is very much fatal to the entire process and not sustainable in law. We adopt the very reasoning herein as well to delete the impugned penalty for this precise reason alone. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed on…

Shreem Construction, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Kolhapur

In the result, both the appeals of the are allowed

ITA 478/PUN/2020[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Pune13 Jun 2022AY 2008-09
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM I.T.A No. 477 & 478/PUN/2020 A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 Shreen Construction Gat No. 315, Plot No. 1, Shri Chhatrapati Shahu Co-op. Industrial Estate, Shirol, Dist. Kolhapur PAN; ABAFS 6064 P : Appellant Vs. The Asstt. C.I.T. Central Cir. Kolhapur : Respondent Appellants by : None Respondent by : Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of Hearing : 13-06-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 13-06-2022 ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM These appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from separate orders of the CIT(A…

Shreem Construction, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Kolhapur

In the result, both the appeals of the are allowed

ITA 477/PUN/2020[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Pune13 Jun 2022AY 2007-08
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM I.T.A No. 477 & 478/PUN/2020 A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 Shreen Construction Gat No. 315, Plot No. 1, Shri Chhatrapati Shahu Co-op. Industrial Estate, Shirol, Dist. Kolhapur PAN; ABAFS 6064 P : Appellant Vs. The Asstt. C.I.T. Central Cir. Kolhapur : Respondent Appellants by : None Respondent by : Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of Hearing : 13-06-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 13-06-2022 ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM These appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from separate orders of the CIT(A…

Sonigara Jewellers Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -6, Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 355/PUN/2020[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Pune09 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sonigara Jewellers Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle-6, 858/59, A 2, Ramsukh Vaishnav, Pune Raviwar Peth, Pune 411 002 Maharashtra, Pan : Aajcs7349N Appellant Respondent

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sonigara Jewellers Private Limited, Vs. DCIT, Circle-6, 858/59, A 2, Ramsukh Vaishnav, Pune Raviwar Peth, Pune 411 002 Maharashtra, PAN : AAJCS7349N Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Rohit Tapadiya Revenue by Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of hearing 09-06-2022 Date of pronouncement 09-06-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-4, Pune on 31-01-2020 confirmi…

Pvp Ventures Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 778/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(2)Section 143(3)Section 22(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.778/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. PVP Ventures Ltd. DCIT बनाम/ 9th Floor, KRM Centre, Corporate Circle-5(2), Vs. Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAACS-3101-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri T. Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. A.R ""…

Green Valley Plywood Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-10(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2835/DEL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Tufail Tahir, Senior DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘H’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2835/Del./2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) Green Valley Plywood Limited, vs. DCIT, Circle 10 (2), 2941/3, Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 055. (PAN : AAACG0323P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri Tufail Tahir, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 01.06.2022 Date of Order : 07.06.2022 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)-22, New Delhi…

Shri Pravin Champalal Bokadia, Mumbai vs. ITO WD-19(2) (5), Mumbai

ITA 7/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.07/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2011-12) Shri Pravin Champalal Bokadia, 77, Dr. Mahimtura Marg, 3Rd Kumbharwada, Near Cp Tank, Mumbai -400 004. Pan: Aaqpb-4778-E ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Ito,Ward 19(2)(5), Room No.210, 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Grant Road(W) Mumbai 400 007. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri R.A.Dhyani सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 02/06/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/06/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri R.A.Dhyani
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…from defective notice are not legally sustainable. In support of his contention the ld.Authorized Representative for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mohammad Farhan A.Shaikh vs. DCIT reported as 434 ITR 1(FB). The second contention of the assessee is that while passing the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has only mentioned that penalty proceedings are being initiated separately. However, nowhere in the assessment order the Assessing Officer has mentioned as to on which limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act penalty proceedings are being initia…

Mukund Trikamlal Parmar, Hyderabad vs. ITO 32(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1079/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhmukund Trikamlal Vs. Ito-32(2)(3), Parmar, C/O P. Murali & Room No. 305, 3 Rd Floor, Co. Chartered C-11, Pratyakshkar Accountants, 6-3- Bhavan, Bandra Kurla 655/2/3, Somajiguda, Complex, Bandra (E), Hyderabad – 500082 Mumbai - 500051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaapp9619E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Laxmikanth RathiFor Respondent: C.T. Mathews
Section 13Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ITA No.1079/Mum/2020 A.Y.2010-11 1 Mukund Trikamlal Parmar Vs. ITO-32(2)(3) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mukund Trikamlal Vs. ITO-32(2)(3), Parmar, C/o P. Murali & Room No. 305, 3 rd Floor, Co. Chartered C-11, Pratyakshkar Accountants, 6-3- Bhavan, Bandra Kurla 655/2/3, Somajiguda, Complex, Bandra (E), Hyderabad – 500082 Mumbai - 500051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AAAPP9619E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Laxmikanth Rathi Respondent by : C.T. Mathews Date of Hearing 02.06.2022 Da…

Clean Science & Technology Pvt.Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Appeal) -2, Pune

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

ITA 961/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. Shingte
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 5

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.961/PUN/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Clean Science & Technology Vs. CIT (Appeals)-2, Pune. Pvt. Ltd., Shubham, New Nagar Road Vidyanagar, Tal- Sangamner, Ahmednagar-422605. PAN : AAICS9799L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by Shri S. P. Walimbe : Date of hearing : 26.05.2022 Date of pronouncement : 27.05.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee dir…

Shri R. Sathiamurthy, Chidambaram vs. ITO, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2197/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…me or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The ld.counsel for the assessee stated that this issue is now covered in favor of assessee by Full Bench decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT, (2021 ) 434 ITR 1 and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Original Kerala Jewellers in TCA No.717 of 2018. 4. On the other hand, the ld. Senior DR stated that this issue is covered in favour of Revenue by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court 3 decision in the case of Gangotri Textiles Ltd., [2021] 276 Taxman 356. 5. In reply, the ld.co…

PAN India Networks Infravest Ltd., Mumbai vs. Ty. CIT (OSD) CC-7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 142/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepan India Networks Infravest Limited V. Dcit- Central Circle – 7(1) 135, Continental Building Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Annie Besant Road Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai - 400018 Pan: Aaccp2459H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jay Bhansali Department By : Shri R.A. Dhyani

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…applied both the limbs to levy the penalty. He prayed that the penalty may be deleted due to defective notice. 4. Ld.Counsel for the assessee submits that Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Full Bench at Goa) in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. DCIT [(2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)] while dealing with the issue of non-strike off of the irrelevant part in the notice issued u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, held 4 Pan India Networks Infravest Limited that assessee must be informed of the grounds of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice and an omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vagueness. Therefore, it is sub…

Rakesh Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-34(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 7804/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7804/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rakesh Gupta, Acit, बनाम H – 87, Ashok Viohar, Circle : 34 (1), Phase – 1, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 052. Pan No. Aewpg7366R अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 10(38)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68Section 69C

…e direct the Registry to place these two Tax Appeals before the Division Bench concerned for further adjudication." 6. As could be seen from the above the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Full Bench at Goa) in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT [(2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)] while dealing with the issue of non-strike off of the irrelevant part in the notice issued u/s.271(l)(c) of the Act, held that assessee must be informed of the grounds of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice and an omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vagueness. This decision squarely applies to the facts of the case. Res…

DCIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Gentech Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1565/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…egal ground by placing reliance on addition of various High Courts. We find that the very same issue is no longer res integra in view of the Full Bench decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Shaikh vs. DCIT reported in 434 ITR 1 (Bom). The relevant head notes of the said judgement is reproduced below:- “Section 271(1)(c), read with section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income (Recording of satisfaction) - Whether where assessment order clearly records satisfaction for imposing penalty on one or other, or both grounds mentioned in section 27…

Villoo'S Greenfield Farms, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -1 (1), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the respective assessees as captioned above are allowed

ITA 1280/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us That In Respect Of Both These Cases, The Issue Involved & The Facts & Circumstances Are Absolutely Identical. These Cases Are Therefore, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Respondent: Shri Subhas Dabade
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM Sr. I.T.A. No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1. 386/PUN/2019 2012-13 Poonawalla Finvest & Agro The Dy. CIT Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 16-B/1 Sarosh Bhawan, 1(1) Pune. Dr. Ambedkar Road, Pune Camp, Pune-411 001 PIN; AAACT6842Q 2. 1280/PUN/2019 2012-13 Villoo Greenfield Farms -do- 16-B/1 Sarosh Bhawan, Dr. Ambvedkar Road, Camp, Pune-411 001 PAN: AACFG5039H Appellants by : Shri Nikhil Pathak Respondent by : Shri Subhas Dabade Date of Hearing : 12-05-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 13-05-2022 ORDER PE…

Poonawalla Finvest and Agro Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -1 (1), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the respective assessees as captioned above are allowed

ITA 386/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us That In Respect Of Both These Cases, The Issue Involved & The Facts & Circumstances Are Absolutely Identical. These Cases Are Therefore, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Respondent: Shri Subhas Dabade
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM Sr. I.T.A. No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1. 386/PUN/2019 2012-13 Poonawalla Finvest & Agro The Dy. CIT Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 16-B/1 Sarosh Bhawan, 1(1) Pune. Dr. Ambedkar Road, Pune Camp, Pune-411 001 PIN; AAACT6842Q 2. 1280/PUN/2019 2012-13 Villoo Greenfield Farms -do- 16-B/1 Sarosh Bhawan, Dr. Ambvedkar Road, Camp, Pune-411 001 PAN: AACFG5039H Appellants by : Shri Nikhil Pathak Respondent by : Shri Subhas Dabade Date of Hearing : 12-05-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 13-05-2022 ORDER PE…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 912/CHNY/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’डी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय -ी महावीर िसंह, उपा34 एवं माननीय -ी मनोज कुमार अ9वाल ,लेखा सद< के सम4। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.905/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.906/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.907/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2000-01) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.908/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.909/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Ass…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 911/CHNY/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’डी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय -ी महावीर िसंह, उपा34 एवं माननीय -ी मनोज कुमार अ9वाल ,लेखा सद< के सम4। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.905/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.906/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.907/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2000-01) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.908/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.909/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Ass…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 910/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’डी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय -ी महावीर िसंह, उपा34 एवं माननीय -ी मनोज कुमार अ9वाल ,लेखा सद< के सम4। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.905/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.906/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.907/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2000-01) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.908/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.909/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Ass…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 909/CHNY/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’डी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय -ी महावीर िसंह, उपा34 एवं माननीय -ी मनोज कुमार अ9वाल ,लेखा सद< के सम4। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.905/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.906/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.907/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2000-01) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.908/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.909/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Ass…

Shri Mahaveerchand Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT CC4(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 908/CHNY/2020[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’डी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय -ी महावीर िसंह, उपा34 एवं माननीय -ी मनोज कुमार अ9वाल ,लेखा सद< के सम4। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.905/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.906/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.907/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2000-01) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.908/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.909/Chny/2020 (िनधाDरणवषD / Ass…