PCIT v. Neeraj Jindal

393 ITR 1High Court2017#627 most cited

What is PCIT v. Neeraj Jindal authority for?

If an assessment under Section 148/147 is accepted without modification or addition, or if an amount is surrendered in a return filed under Section 153A, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income can be imposed.

157

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Neeraj Jindal · 393 ITR 1 · Section 271(1)(c) penalty · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · Section 153A assessment · surrender of income · Section 148 reassessment · assessment accepted without modification

Also reported as

79 Taxmann.com 96

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 147Section 132Section 274
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 90(3)section 65(b)section 276section 80hhc(3)section 65b(4)section 163section 153b(1)section 42azadi bachao andolanhouse property incomesection 115japenalty under section 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing PCIT v. Neeraj Jindal

Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2670/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Sjri Tejas Vinubhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central, Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2669/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel, Kalol vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2668/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel, Kalol vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2667/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel, Kalol vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2666/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel, Kalol vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2665/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel, Kalol vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2664/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel, Kalol vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2663/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel (Through Legal Heir Smt. Shraddha Pragnesh Patel., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2662/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2662 /Ahd/2017 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 Late Pragnesh Navinbhai Patel Through Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Legal Heir Smt.Shraddha Pragnesh Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 39, Kamalnayan Bungalows Aarohi Club Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abbpp 5517 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2669, 2670 & 2671/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 48, Alok Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad. Sun-N-Step Club Road Pan : Ahbps 5069 H आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2663 To 2668/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2012-13 Shri Pravinbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) 8, Sardar Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Ambica Nagar Highway Road Kalol (N.G.) Pan : Afupp 7843 M

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak,Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…trued that some assets were found during the course of search representing that income which has been declared by the appellants. Somewhat similar and identical issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 393 ITR 1. The following finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court is worth to note. It reads as under: “26. Now for the Revenue to invoke Explanation 5, it would have to prove that its requirements are clearly fulfilled in the present case. In order for Explanation 5 to apply, it is necessary that there must be certain assets (such as money, bullion etc.) found i…

Babita Khurana, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 4707/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 274Section 50C

…lying deeming provision of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that return of income have been accepted under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT vs. Neeraj Jindal & Ankur Aggarwal (2017) 393 ITR 1 (Del.) held as under : “Held, that since the return under section 153A had been accepted by the Assessing Officer there was no concealment of income. Moreover, for the relevant assessment years, 2005-06 and 2006-07, no material was recovered during the search. Rather, the assessee added Rs.21,65,932 in the return filed pursuant to notice under sec…

M/S. Krishna Maruti Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4173/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate and Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Senior DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(iv)

…in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt.Ltd. – [2010] 322 ITR 158 (SC) and the following decisions of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court :- (i) Principal CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal – [2017] 393 ITR 1 (Del). (ii) Principal CIT Vs. Samtel India Ltd. – ITA No.43/2017. He stated that no details or particulars furnished by the assessee were found to be incorrect, false or wrong and, therefore, merely because the deduction is allowed at the rate of 100% as against 150%, it cannot be said that the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of its 4 ITA…

Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2871/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…Act, the original return under section 139 abates and become non-est. The assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the 10 ITA.No.2871/Del./2018 Shri Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi. case of Pr. CIT vs. Neeraj Jindal & Another (2017) 393 ITR 1 (Del.) (HC). 5.2. The Ld. CIT(A), however, did not accept the contention of assessee and noted that Ld. CIT(A) has power to initiate penalty proceedings 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has recorded satisfaction during proceedings pending under the Act. Since no return of income was filed in the regular course and it was filed only after searc…

M/S. Ose Infrastructure Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2013-14 is hereby deleted

ITA 5895/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 174Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…, such return takes the place and deemed to have been filed the return u/s 139(1) of the Act and since the assessment is complete accepting the revised return, no penalty could be levied. For this proposition, he placed reliance on CIT vs Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 1 (Del)(HC); ACIT vs Splendor Landbase Ltd., ITA No.2461/Del/2016 (ITAT Del); and Prem Arora vs DCIT (2017) 78 DTR 91. Lastly, it is contended by the learned AR that during the search no incriminating documents, assets or income was found which resulted in the addition, as such, under Explanation 5A of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, no penalty is levi…

M/S. Ose Infrastructure Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2013-14 is hereby deleted

ITA 5894/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 174Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…, such return takes the place and deemed to have been filed the return u/s 139(1) of the Act and since the assessment is complete accepting the revised return, no penalty could be levied. For this proposition, he placed reliance on CIT vs Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 1 (Del)(HC); ACIT vs Splendor Landbase Ltd., ITA No.2461/Del/2016 (ITAT Del); and Prem Arora vs DCIT (2017) 78 DTR 91. Lastly, it is contended by the learned AR that during the search no incriminating documents, assets or income was found which resulted in the addition, as such, under Explanation 5A of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, no penalty is levi…

M/S. Ose Infrastructure Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2013-14 is hereby deleted

ITA 5893/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 174Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…, such return takes the place and deemed to have been filed the return u/s 139(1) of the Act and since the assessment is complete accepting the revised return, no penalty could be levied. For this proposition, he placed reliance on CIT vs Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 1 (Del)(HC); ACIT vs Splendor Landbase Ltd., ITA No.2461/Del/2016 (ITAT Del); and Prem Arora vs DCIT (2017) 78 DTR 91. Lastly, it is contended by the learned AR that during the search no incriminating documents, assets or income was found which resulted in the addition, as such, under Explanation 5A of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, no penalty is levi…

M/S. Ose Infrastructure Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2013-14 is hereby deleted

ITA 5892/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 174Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…, such return takes the place and deemed to have been filed the return u/s 139(1) of the Act and since the assessment is complete accepting the revised return, no penalty could be levied. For this proposition, he placed reliance on CIT vs Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 1 (Del)(HC); ACIT vs Splendor Landbase Ltd., ITA No.2461/Del/2016 (ITAT Del); and Prem Arora vs DCIT (2017) 78 DTR 91. Lastly, it is contended by the learned AR that during the search no incriminating documents, assets or income was found which resulted in the addition, as such, under Explanation 5A of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, no penalty is levi…

M/S. Ose Infrastructure Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2013-14 is hereby deleted

ITA 5891/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 174Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…, such return takes the place and deemed to have been filed the return u/s 139(1) of the Act and since the assessment is complete accepting the revised return, no penalty could be levied. For this proposition, he placed reliance on CIT vs Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 1 (Del)(HC); ACIT vs Splendor Landbase Ltd., ITA No.2461/Del/2016 (ITAT Del); and Prem Arora vs DCIT (2017) 78 DTR 91. Lastly, it is contended by the learned AR that during the search no incriminating documents, assets or income was found which resulted in the addition, as such, under Explanation 5A of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, no penalty is levi…

Ramesh Chand Bansal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Ajmer

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 398/JPR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Jun 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena, JCIT - DR
Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 139Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ITA No. 398/JP/2015 Shri Ramesh Chand Bansal vs DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,o Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 398,399, 400 & 401/JP/2015 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 cuke Shri Ramesh Chand Bansal The DCIT Vs. 27, Ravidatt, Arya Nagar, Central Circle Beawar Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACMPB 6056D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent f…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Splendor Landbase Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2461/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanti.T.A. No.2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner M/S Splendor Landbase Of Income, Central Vs. Limited, Circle-3, F-38/2, Splendor House, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 215/Del/2016 In I.T.A. No. 2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 M/S Splendor Landbase Assistant Commissioner Limited, Vs. Of Income, Central Circle- F-38/2, Splendor House, 3, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kr. Chopra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154

…ed under Section 153A, the original return under Section 139 abates and becomes non-est. In this regard, the appellant relies upon the decision of Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-19 Vs Neeraj Jindal [2017] 393 ITR 1 (Delhi). We quote from para 20 & 21 of the said case as under: “20. Therefore, the position that emerges from the above-mentioned provision is that once the assessee files a revised return under Section 153A, for all other provisions of the Act, the revised return will be treated as the original return filed under Section 139. On similar lines,…

Rajesh D. Dedhia, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 2711/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Shri G. Manjunatha, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2711/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Rajesh D. Dedhia बिधम/ Acit, Central Circle-23, Room No. 409, 4Th Floor, C-308, Shreenath Darshan, Vs. Off, 30 Tp. Road, Borivali Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. (W), Mumbai-400092 Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abhpd1165B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajat Mittal ( Dr) Assessee By: Shri B.V. Jhaveri (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 17.04.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17.05.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 09.02.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-52 Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Ay. 2010- 11 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Confirmed. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - 1. The Commissioner (Appeals) Erred In Confirming Penalty Under Section 27I(L)(C) Of Rs.20,78,458/- Invoking Explanation-5 A To Section 271(1) (C) Of The It. Act 1961, 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) Failed To Appreciate That The Income Of Rs,71,53F28Q/- Is Added To The Income Of (He Assessee On Estimation Of Gross Profile At 26.40% Of The Goods Sold

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal ( DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 27I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, AM AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2711/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Rajesh D. Dedhia बिधम/ ACIT, Central Circle-23, Room No. 409, 4th Floor, C-308, Shreenath Darshan, Vs. Off, 30 TP. Road, Borivali Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. (W), Mumbai-400092 Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ABHPD1165B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Rajat Mittal ( DR) Assessee by: Shri B.V. Jhaveri (AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 17.04.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /…