P.M. Perianna Pillai v. CIT

46 STC 94High Court1980#20918 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 115JBSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 155(18)Section 2016Section 246A

Issues it is cited on

section 270a(6)(a)section 270a(8)section 270a(6)section 270a(9)under-reporting of incomepenalty under section 270asection 270section 270asection 115jsection 115jblevy of penaltysection 27

Judgments citing P.M. Perianna Pillai v. CIT

Capgemini Technology Services India Limited (Successor to Liquidhub India Private Limited), Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Pune

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2753/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2753/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Capgemini Technology V Assessment Unit, Services India S Income Tax Limited(Successor To Liquid Department. Hub India Private Limited), Plot No.14, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi, Phase Iii, Midc Sez, Village Man, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune – 411057. Pan: Aaacl8943J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sudin Sabnis & Shri Siddhesh Khandalkar Revenue By Shri Madhukar Anand-Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 05/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2020-21 Dated 02.09.2025 Emanating From The Penalty Order Passed Under Section

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 155Section 155(18)Section 18Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(6)(a)Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.2753/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Capgemini Technology V Assessment Unit, Services India s Income Tax Limited(Successor to Liquid Department. Hub India Private Limited), Plot No.14, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi, Phase III, MIDC SEZ, Village Man, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune – 411057. PAN: AAACL8943J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Sudin Sabnis…

Pranam Enterprise, Junagadh vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.391/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Pranam Enterprise Vs. The Dcit Office No.3, City Centre, Opp. Circle-1(1), Rajkot New Collector Office, Junagadh – 362001, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaffp7926H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar Respondent By Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am:

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(1)Section 274Section 80I

…facts. In the case of CIT v. Om Prakash Mittal [2005] 194 CTR 97/273 ITR 326/143 Taxman 373 (SC), it was held that the term "misrepresentation" implies that there is no true and fair disclosure. The Madras High Court in the case of P.M. Perianna Pillai v. CIT 46 STC 94 has held that the act of making a false or misleading assertion about something, usually with the intent to deceive amounts to "misrepresentation'. The word "misrepresentation" denotes not just written or spoken words but also any other conduct that amounts to a false assertion. The assertion so made, an assertion that does not accord with the fact…

Sushil Rajendra Kothari, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 19(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4734/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Revenue /For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 270Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 270A(9)Section 57

…e Act. In the case of CIT v. Om Prakash Mittal [2005] 194 CTR 97/273 ITR 326/143 Taxman 373 (SC), it was held that the term "misrepresentation" implies that there is no true and fair disclosure. The Madras High Court in the case of P.M. Perianna Pillai v. CIT 46 STC 94 has held that the act of making a false or misleading assertion about something, usually with the intent to deceive amounts to "misrepresentation' and the assertion so made, that does not accord with the facts is also termed false representation. In assessee's case the assessee has made the claim of interest at the rate of 18% which AO's view is in…

Parulben Vijaykumar Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 164/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(10)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

…o assessee’s particular set of facts. In the case of CIT vs. Om Prakash Mittal 273 ITR 326 (SC), it was held that the term “misrepresentation” implies that there is no true and fair disclosure. The Madras High Court in the case of P.M. Perianna Pillai vs. CIT 46 STC 94 has held that the act of making a false or misleading assertion about something, usually with the intent to deceive amounts to “misrepresentation’. The word “misrepresentation” denotes not just written or spoken words but also any other conduct that amounts to a false assertion. The assertion so made, an assertion that does not accord with the fact…

P.M. Perianna Pillai v. CIT (46 STC 94) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax