What is Paharpur Industries Ltd. v. ITO ( authority for?

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied if the assessee made a bona fide mistake or acted upon the advice of counsel, as this does not constitute concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

How many judgments cite Paharpur Industries Ltd. v. ITO (?

10 judgments on BharatTax cite Paharpur Industries Ltd. v. ITO ( (232 CTR 78), spanning 2018 to 2021.

Paharpur Industries Ltd. v. ITO ( (232 CTR 78)

Ms. Varsha Jitendra Tekwani, Baroda vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(4), Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 1623/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1623/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ms Varsha Jitendra Tekwani, Income-Tax Officer, Flat No.302, Vs. Ward-3(1)(4), Jay Ranchod Avenue, Vadodara. Harni-Varasiya Ring Road, Vadodara.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr.D.R

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 50C

…the part of the assessee to furnish/ conceal the income on account of sale of the property. In this regard, A.Y. 2009-10 7 we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dipak Kumar reported in 232 CTR 78 wherein it was held as under: “5. Having heard learned counsel, we are of the view that the question concerning bona fide mistake or belief is more or less a question of fact, which has been decided by the CIT(A) on the basis of the affidavit filed by the counsel. There is no finding of intentional and motivated mistake which might have been reso…

Shri Hasmukhbhai Bachubhai Radadia, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2742/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2742/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Hashmukhbhai Bachubhai Vs. Dcit, Radadia, Circle – 3(3), 492, Avadh, Opp. Amul Ice- Ahmedabad. Cream Parlour, Lad Society Road, Vastrapur, Ahmedabad. (Pan No. Aaqpr 7176 N) , , अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri U. S. Bhati & Abhimanyu Bhati, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Appellate Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A)” In Short] Dated 22.09.2016 Relevant To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1.0 The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Penalty Order. 2.0 The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law & On Facts In Concluding That Mistake Committed By The Appellant Was Intentional. He Has Further Erred In Not Considering The Explanation Of The Appellant Duly Supported By The Affidavits To The Effect That The Advocate

For Appellant: Shri U. S. Bhati & AbhimanyuFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

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

…ala-fide act on the part of the assessee to furnish/ conceal the income on account of sale of the property. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dipak Kumar reported in 232 CTR 78 wherein it was held as under: “5. Having heard learned counsel, we are of the view that the question concerning bona fide mistake or belief is more or less a question of fact, which has been decided by the CIT(A) on the basis of the affidavit filed by the counsel. There is no finding of intentional and motivated mistake which might have been reso…