Muninaga Reddy v. ACIT

141 ITD 590Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#6992 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing Muninaga Reddy v. ACIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE,, AHMEDNAGAR vs. ABHIJIT PURUSHOTTAM PATHAK,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1150/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income and levied penalty of Rs.51,01,472/- being minimum penalty @ 100%. The CIT(A) by placing reliance of the orders of ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO reported in 141 ITD 590, ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Vipul Life Sciences Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported in 68 SOT 321 and also decision of Hon‟ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. S.S.M. Ahmed Hussain reported in 85 taxmann.com 351 (Mad.) on identical issues vide Para Nos. 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4, respectively in the impugned order held when assessment is completed on…

SHRI MOHAMED MOHTRAM FAROOQUI,JHUNJHUNU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, JHUNJHUNU

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

ITA 1252/JPR/2019[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Dec 2020AY 1993-94
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 132(12)Section 132(4)Section 132(5)Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…• CIT Vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals (2011) 335 ITR 259 (Del.) • PCIT Vs. Shree Sai Developers (2019) 418 ITR 306 (Guj.) • Sh. Rajendra Shringi Vs. DCIT (2020) 77 ITR (Trib) 0085 (Jaipur) 7 Sh. Mohamed Mohtram Farooqui vs. ACIT, Jhunjhunu • Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO 141 ITD 590 (2013) (Bang.) • DCIT Vs. Dr. Satish B. Gupta (2011) 49 DTR 262 (Ahd.) • CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC) 15. Per contra, the ld DR submitted that as per sub-section (3) of section 132A, provisions of sub-section (4A) to (14) of section 132(1) shall apply as if such books of accounts, other documents or assets have been s…

SMT. VAISHALI TUSHAR JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 736/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

SMT. VAISHALI TUSHAR JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 735/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

SMT. VAISHALI TUSHAR JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 734/PUN/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

SMT. VAISHALI TUSHAR JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 733/PUN/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

SMT. SHAKUNTALA R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 732/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

SMT. SHAKUNTALA R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 731/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

SMT. SHAKUNTALA R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 730/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

SMT. SHAKUNTALA R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 729/PUN/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

TUSHAR R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 728/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

TUSHAR R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 727/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

TUSHAR R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 726/PUN/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

TUSHAR R. JAGTAP,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 725/PUN/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal &
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…r dated 13.01.2017. He also placed reliance on the ratio laid down in the following decisions:- i) Ravi Sud Vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (Trib) 356 (Mumbai) ii) Muninaga Reddy Vs. ACIT (2013) 37 taxmann.com 440 (Bangalore – Trib) iii) Vasavi Shelters Vs. ITO (2013) 141 ITD 590 (Bangalore) 12. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, pointed out that the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of assessment proceedings during penalty proceedings. In this regard, he placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) CIT ITA Nos.729 to 732/PU…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. HARVEER SINGH KALRA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 6441/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita Nos. 6438 & 6439/Del/2016 : Asstt. Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Acit, Vs Smt. Mehar Anand, Central Circle-14, A-29, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110065 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afepa9193B Ita Nos. 6440 & 6441/Del/2016 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2011-12 Acit, Vs Sh. Harveer Singh Kalra, Central Circle-14, A-29, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110065 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afbpk6171Q Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Chadha, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2017 Order These Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 07.09.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxvi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…r the purposes of tax". This is an identical case, where survey operations had taken place and the assessment was reopened u/s 148, the coordinate Bench deleted the penalty. 21. Same view has been held in the case of Valavi Shelters vs ITO, reported in [2013] 141 ITD 590, by the Bangalore Bench of the ITAT." ITA Nos. 6438 to 6441/Del/2016 11 Mehar Anand & Harveer Singh Kalra 8. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee deleted the penalty by observing in para 7 of the impugned order as under: “7. I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of penalty imposed by the AO and the argu…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. MEHAR ANAND, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 6438/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita Nos. 6438 & 6439/Del/2016 : Asstt. Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Acit, Vs Smt. Mehar Anand, Central Circle-14, A-29, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110065 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afepa9193B Ita Nos. 6440 & 6441/Del/2016 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2011-12 Acit, Vs Sh. Harveer Singh Kalra, Central Circle-14, A-29, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110065 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afbpk6171Q Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Chadha, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2017 Order These Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 07.09.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxvi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…r the purposes of tax". This is an identical case, where survey operations had taken place and the assessment was reopened u/s 148, the coordinate Bench deleted the penalty. 21. Same view has been held in the case of Valavi Shelters vs ITO, reported in [2013] 141 ITD 590, by the Bangalore Bench of the ITAT." ITA Nos. 6438 to 6441/Del/2016 11 Mehar Anand & Harveer Singh Kalra 8. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee deleted the penalty by observing in para 7 of the impugned order as under: “7. I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of penalty imposed by the AO and the argu…