National Textiles v. CIT

249 ITR 125High Court2001#763 most cited

What is National Textiles v. CIT authority for?

The levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) requires material evidence that the assessed amount does not represent the assessee's income and proof of conscious concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. A penalty cannot be sustained merely because income is assessed on an estimation basis without positive evidence of concealment.

134

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

National Textiles v. CIT · penalty under section 271(1)(c) · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · income assessed on estimation · levy of penalty · animus · 249 ITR 125 · Gujarat High Court

Also reported as

164 CTR 2009

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularsconcealment of incomepenalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 274levy of penaltysection 271(1)commissioner (appeals)section 44section 271section 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing National Textiles v. CIT

The DCIT-1(3)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. M/S Fern Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1402/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 139Section 143Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…P.K. Narayanan (1999) 238 ITR 905 (Ker) that the addition being made and sustained in assessment and appellate proceedings would not toy itself justify penalty for concealment being levied. Likewise, the Gujarat High Court in National Textiles vs. CIT (2001) 249 ITR 125 (Guj) has also held that the imposition of penalty cannot be justified merely because of additions being sustained and similar view was earlier expressed by the same High Court in CIT vs. S.P. Bhatt (1974) 97 ITR 440 (Guj) and CIT vs. Vinay Chand Hiralal (1979) 120 ITR 752 (Guj) for penalty not to be levied and it was further made clear that when…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 245D(4)Section 271A

…s ACIT ITAT, Ahmedabad 'B' Third Member Bench (2001 73 TTJ (Ahd) 171. (v) CIT vs Bengal Galvanising Works (1987) 165 ITR 249 (Cal) (vi) Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 9. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 321/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar ( Adv.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 127Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…s ACIT ITAT, Ahmedabad 'B' Third Member Bench (2001 73 TTJ (Ahd) 171. (v) CIT vs Bengal Galvanising Works (1987) 165 ITR 249 (Cal) (vi) Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 4. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 320/JPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar ( Adv.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 127Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…s ACIT ITAT, Ahmedabad 'B' Third Member Bench (2001 73 TTJ (Ahd) 171. (v) CIT vs Bengal Galvanising Works (1987) 165 ITR 249 (Cal) (vi) Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 4. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 319/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar ( Adv.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 127Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…s ACIT ITAT, Ahmedabad 'B' Third Member Bench (2001 73 TTJ (Ahd) 171. (v) CIT vs Bengal Galvanising Works (1987) 165 ITR 249 (Cal) (vi) Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 4. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs…

Ranjit D. Rathod, Delwada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Rajkot

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 103/RJT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2012-13 Ranjit D. Rathod Ito, Ward-1(3) Prop. Of M/S.Shree Ganesh Marine Vs Veraval. Nr. Railway Station Main Road Delwada. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ngs. As such the penalty 6 proceedings being distinct and separate from the assessment proceedings, the AO is under the obligation to carry out the fresh verification as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT reported 249 ITR 125. The relevant extract of the judgment is extracted below: “In the instant case, the cash credits were not satisfactorily explained by evidence and documents. The parties who had advanced the alleged temporary loans were neither disclosed with their particulars nor any supporting documents were on record. Only two entries were explained. The acco…

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under intendment Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 409/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…f the assessee. As such the penalty proceedings being distinct and separate from the assessment proceedings, the AO is under the obligation to carry out the fresh verification as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles reported 249 ITR 125. The relevant extract of the judgment is extracted below: “In the instant case, the cash credits were not satisfactorily explained by evidence and documents. The parties who had advanced the alleged temporary loans were neither disclosed with their particulars nor any supporting documents were on record. Only two entries were explained. The acco…

Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 408/AHD/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…f the assessee. As such the penalty proceedings being distinct and separate from the assessment proceedings, the AO is under the obligation to carry out the fresh verification as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles reported 249 ITR 125. The relevant extract of the judgment is extracted below: “In the instant case, the cash credits were not satisfactorily explained by evidence and documents. The parties who had advanced the alleged temporary loans were neither disclosed with their particulars nor any supporting documents were on record. Only two entries were explained. The acco…

Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 407/AHD/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…f the assessee. As such the penalty proceedings being distinct and separate from the assessment proceedings, the AO is under the obligation to carry out the fresh verification as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles reported 249 ITR 125. The relevant extract of the judgment is extracted below: “In the instant case, the cash credits were not satisfactorily explained by evidence and documents. The parties who had advanced the alleged temporary loans were neither disclosed with their particulars nor any supporting documents were on record. Only two entries were explained. The acco…

Anisha R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 406/AHD/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…f the assessee. As such the penalty proceedings being distinct and separate from the assessment proceedings, the AO is under the obligation to carry out the fresh verification as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles reported 249 ITR 125. The relevant extract of the judgment is extracted below: “In the instant case, the cash credits were not satisfactorily explained by evidence and documents. The parties who had advanced the alleged temporary loans were neither disclosed with their particulars nor any supporting documents were on record. Only two entries were explained. The acco…

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

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

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 907/CHNY/2020[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2000-01

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

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

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 906/CHNY/2020[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 1999-2000

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

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

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

ITA 905/CHNY/2020[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 1998-99

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

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…

Kemia Industries Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1276/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…e assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature." 37. On this issue, a useful reference can be to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT [reported in (2001) 249 ITR 125], which related to the assessment year 1974-75 wherein it was held that in order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist namely (i) there must be some material or circumstance leading to a reasonable conclusion that the amount does not represent the assessee's income and it is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amoun…