PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

432 ITR 84High Court2021#515 most cited

What is PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer's failure to specify the exact limb (i.e., concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars) in the show-cause notice issued under Section 274 for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) vitiates the entire penalty proceedings.

185

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274 · penalty show-cause notice · specifying limb · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · vitiates penalty proceedings · Section 270A · 270AA immunity

Also reported as

108 Taxmann.com 597

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 153ASection 250Section 147Section 270AA
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 270(a)record dateimmunity under section 270aasection 270a(8)section 270aasection 270a(6)section 271(l)(c)section 271(l)section 270a(9)section 274penalty u/s 270afurnishing inaccurate particulars

Judgments citing PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

A.R. Chadha & Co. India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-1(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5059/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Chopra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Zahid Parvez, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “A” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.5059/Del./2019 Assessment Year 2010-2011 M/s. A.R. Chadha & CO. (I) The DCIT Pvt. Ltd., Office No.8, 1st Floor, Scindia House, Atma Circle-1(1), [vs. Ram Mansion, KG Marg, New Delhi – 110 001 New Delhi. PAN AAACA1108L (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Rajan Chopra, C.A. For Revenue : Shri Zahid Parvez, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 07.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.06.2022 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, A.M. This appeal by Assessee has been dire…

Ashoka Machine Tools Intl. Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward -3(3), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1900/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…proceedings initiated vide impugned notice by the Assessing Officer is illegal and unjustified and contrary to the law laid down by the by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT Vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. (2021) 432 ITR 84 (Del); PCIT Vs. GOA Coastal Resort & Recreation Pvt. Ltd. - (2020) 272 Taxman 157 (Bom.); and PCIT Vs. GOA Coastal Resorts and Recreation pvt. Ltd. (2021) 282 Taxman 463 (SC). 3. On the contrary, learned DR opposed the submissions and submitted that the assessee cannot take benefit of procedural irregularity. He further contended that the assess…

Vishnu & Co.Trademarks P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2625/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shripradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryvishnu & Co. Trademarks P. Vs. Acit, Ltd, Circle-26(2), R-649, New Rajnider Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccv5192K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhavi, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, Ld. CIT DR
Section 250(6)Section 271Section 274

…evant clause would lead to an inference of non- application of mind by the Assessing Officer and levy of penalty would suffers from non-application of mind. 5.4 Even the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) while following the cases referred above, held as under: “21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notic…

Pranav Kumar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Int. Tax. Circle-2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 8812/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

…inapplicable portion would not satisfy the requirement of law and in support of the aforesaid contentions, he placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., reported in [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). 5. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand supported the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions made by both the sides and perused the material on record. The issue in the present appeal is with respect to levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In the present appeal, the show…

DCIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal, Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1919/DEL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Gopal Kumar Goyal, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1563/DEL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Gopal Kumar Goyal, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1475/DEL/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Kanta Rani, Gurgaon vs. DCIT Central Cirlce-14, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1290/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Kanta Rani, Gurgaon vs. DCIT Central Cirlce-14, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1289/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Gopal Gauba, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1288/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Gopal Gauba, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1287/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Gaurav Gauba, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1285/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Akdant Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of Assessees are allowed

ITA 1094/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 144Section 153ASection 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…alty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Sheikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) for the proposition that when in the notice which was in printed form…

Vineeta Sehgal, G B Nagar vs. ITO, Ward-4(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6729/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 275

…by the Assessing Officer, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is imposable and in support of 5 her contention, she placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. reported in (2021) 432 ITR 84 (Del.) and other decisions. 7. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand supported the orders of lower authorities & submitted that the assessment order & penalty order have to be seen together & not in isolation. 8. We have heard the rival submissions & and perused the material on record. The issue in the present appeal is with res…

Vibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-9, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 7195/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N. K. Choudhryvibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Addl. It, Special R-561, Shankar Road, Range-9,New Delhi. New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcs7623P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ShriK.C. Singhal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Vibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Addl. IT, Special R-561, Shankar Road, Range-9,New Delhi. New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. PAN: AABCS7623P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: ShriK.C. Singhal, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17/03/2022 Date of pronouncement 29/03/2022 O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: The Assessee has preferred the instant appeal against the order dated 20.07.2018 impugned herein passed by the ld. Commissioner of Incom…

Mohan Exports India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 3590/DEL/2019[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor & Shri N. K. Choudhrymohan Exports India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 8-9, Mohan House, Jamrudpur Circle-5(1), Community Cen Tre, Kailash New Delhi Colony Extension New Delhi - 110048. Pan: Aaacm4168J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shrin. K. Chopra,Ca. Revenue By : Ms. Swetayadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24/03/2022

For Appellant: ShriN. K. chopra,CAFor Respondent: Ms. SwetaYadav, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 274r

…levant clause would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and levy of penalty would suffers from non- application of mind. 7. Even the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) while following the cases referred above, held as under: “21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notice…

Tdi Infracorp (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5929/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. Brr Kumarr Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…which he intended to impose penalty, thus, he submitted, the penalty order passed without application of mind is invalid. In support of such contention, he relied upon the following decisions: i) Principal CIT Vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (2021) 432 ITR 84 (Delhi) (HC); ii) Silicon Graphic System Indi Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCIT – ITA No. 2978/Del/2013 Dated 10.03.2021; 5. As regards, the merits of the case, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that neither the assessee has concealed any income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, there is no justifiable reason for imposing pe…

M/S. Proform Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4991/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedia N D Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Ms. Lalitha KrishnamurthyFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…which limb the penalty is proposed to be imposed, it would lead to an inference as to non application of mind, thus vitiating imposition of penalty. 10. We find that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (2021) 432 ITR 84 (Del), after considering the decision in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 (Kar) & CIT vs. SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 Taxman.com 241 (Kar) [where the SLP filed by Revneue was dismissed and reported in (2016) 386 ITR (ST) 13 (SC)] has held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not leviable when the notice issu…

Aesthetica Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5133/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi07 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha, Sr.DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…n ITAs No.5118, 5119, 5120 and 5121/Del/2017 where in the identical fact situation the penalty has been quashed. A further reference was made to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in case of (i) PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. as reported in 432 ITR 84 (Del.); (ii) CIT & Anr. v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory, 359 ITR 565 (Karn); (iii) Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. Dy. CIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 [Bom (FB)], for the proposition that notice issued under Section 274 r.w. Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is bad in law where it did not specify under which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, penalty proce…

Aesthetica Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5132/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Delhi07 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha, Sr.DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…n ITAs No.5118, 5119, 5120 and 5121/Del/2017 where in the identical fact situation the penalty has been quashed. A further reference was made to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in case of (i) PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. as reported in 432 ITR 84 (Del.); (ii) CIT & Anr. v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory, 359 ITR 565 (Karn); (iii) Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. Dy. CIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 [Bom (FB)], for the proposition that notice issued under Section 274 r.w. Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is bad in law where it did not specify under which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, penalty proce…