Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra v. ITO

174 TTJ 516Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#13597 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,254 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Judgments citing Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra v. ITO

Kishan Kumar Agarwal, Secunderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 573/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.573/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Kishan Kumar Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Agarwal Central Circle 2(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Ablpa3923C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/01/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 2.12.2022 Of The Learned Cit(A)-12, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2016-17. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) In Confirming The Penalty Of Rs.17,05,680/- Levied By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…same should be deleted. 10. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly supported the order of the learned CIT (A). Referring to the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra vs. Income Tax Officer reported in 174 TTJ 516 (Pune Trib.) and the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. J. Mythili reported in (2014) 149 ITD 275 (Chennai Trib.) she submitted that in view of the specific provision of Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) of the Act, penalty was rightly levied by the Assessing Officer and rightly sustained by the learned CIT (A…

Joshi Wadewale Shewalwadi, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 99/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s no merit in holding the assessee to be in default. 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue stands covered by the ratio laid down by Pune Bench of Tribunal in Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra Vs. ITO (2015) 174 TTJ 516 (Pune). 13. In respect of partnership firms, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee referred to additional grounds of appeal raised before the Tribunal. He stressed that where the facts were on record and the facts of search were on record, then the additional grounds of appeal can be admitted. He stressed that where papers were…

Mrs. Vasundhara Shailesh Joshi, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 96/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s no merit in holding the assessee to be in default. 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue stands covered by the ratio laid down by Pune Bench of Tribunal in Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra Vs. ITO (2015) 174 TTJ 516 (Pune). 13. In respect of partnership firms, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee referred to additional grounds of appeal raised before the Tribunal. He stressed that where the facts were on record and the facts of search were on record, then the additional grounds of appeal can be admitted. He stressed that where papers were…

Mrs. Vasundhara Shailesh Joshi, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 95/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s no merit in holding the assessee to be in default. 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue stands covered by the ratio laid down by Pune Bench of Tribunal in Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra Vs. ITO (2015) 174 TTJ 516 (Pune). 13. In respect of partnership firms, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee referred to additional grounds of appeal raised before the Tribunal. He stressed that where the facts were on record and the facts of search were on record, then the additional grounds of appeal can be admitted. He stressed that where papers were…

Joshi Wadewale Hadapsar, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 105/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s no merit in holding the assessee to be in default. 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue stands covered by the ratio laid down by Pune Bench of Tribunal in Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra Vs. ITO (2015) 174 TTJ 516 (Pune). 13. In respect of partnership firms, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee referred to additional grounds of appeal raised before the Tribunal. He stressed that where the facts were on record and the facts of search were on record, then the additional grounds of appeal can be admitted. He stressed that where papers were…

Joshi Wadewale Prabhat Cinema, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 102/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s no merit in holding the assessee to be in default. 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue stands covered by the ratio laid down by Pune Bench of Tribunal in Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra Vs. ITO (2015) 174 TTJ 516 (Pune). 13. In respect of partnership firms, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee referred to additional grounds of appeal raised before the Tribunal. He stressed that where the facts were on record and the facts of search were on record, then the additional grounds of appeal can be admitted. He stressed that where papers were…

Joshi Wadewale Shewalwadi, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 100/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s no merit in holding the assessee to be in default. 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue stands covered by the ratio laid down by Pune Bench of Tribunal in Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra Vs. ITO (2015) 174 TTJ 516 (Pune). 13. In respect of partnership firms, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee referred to additional grounds of appeal raised before the Tribunal. He stressed that where the facts were on record and the facts of search were on record, then the additional grounds of appeal can be admitted. He stressed that where papers were…

Mrs.Sarita Kaur Manjeet Singh Chopra v. ITO (174 TTJ 516) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax