Principal Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd.

394 ITR 312High Court2017#1332 most cited

What is Principal Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. authority for?

The date of initiation of penalty proceedings for the purpose of Section 275(1)(c) is when the Assessing Officer records a satisfaction or recommends penalty, not the later date when the Joint/Additional Commissioner of Income Tax issues the penalty notice.

86

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Mahesh Wood Products · Section 275(1)(c) · penalty initiation date · limitation for penalty order · Assessing Officer recommendation · JCIT penalty notice · Section 271D · Section 271E · Section 269SS · Section 269T

Also reported as

82 Taxmann.com 39

Sections most often in play

Section 271DSection 269SSSection 269TSection 271ESection 153ASection 275(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 275

Issues it is cited on

section 275(1)section 275(1)(c)section 275(1)(a)penalty under section 271esection 275penalty under section 271dsection 269tsection 271esection 245hsection 269sssection 271drevision under section 263

Judgments citing Principal Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd.

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Sh. Ashwani Gupta, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1059/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Revenue Has Assailed The Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 In

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 269SSection 269TSection 271D

…1- Е beyond 30th June 2008, the Additional CIT defeated the very object of Section 275 (1) (c)." Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)/[2017] 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) [05-05-2017] held as under.- "9. However, this question came up for consideration in JKD Capital &Finlease Ltd. (supra). The date on which the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings was taken to be the relevant date as far as Section 275(1)(c) was concerned. There was no explanation for the delay of nearly five years in the…

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Sh. Ashwani Gupta, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1058/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Revenue Has Assailed The Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 In

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 269SSection 269TSection 271D

…1- Е beyond 30th June 2008, the Additional CIT defeated the very object of Section 275 (1) (c)." Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)/[2017] 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) [05-05-2017] held as under.- "9. However, this question came up for consideration in JKD Capital &Finlease Ltd. (supra). The date on which the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings was taken to be the relevant date as far as Section 275(1)(c) was concerned. There was no explanation for the delay of nearly five years in the…

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Sh. Ashwani Gupta, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1057/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Revenue Has Assailed The Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 In

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 269SSection 269TSection 271D

…71- E beyond 30th June 2008, the Additional CIT defeated the very object of Section 275 (1) (c). Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)/[2017] 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) [05-05-2017] held as under.- "9. However, this question came up for consideration in JKD Capital &Finlease Ltd. (supra). The date on which the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings was taken to be the relevant date as far as Section 275(1)(c) was concerned. There was no explanation for the delay of nearly five years in the…

Nimmatoori Ramesh Babu, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 597/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Respondent: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 269Section 271Section 271DSection 271D(2)Section 273BSection 4

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.594, 596 & 597/Hyd./2025 Assessment Years 2016-2017 & 2017-2018 Late Nimmatoori Raja Babu, Hyderabad. PAN ACSPN1662R The ACIT, Late Nimmatoori Raja Babu, L/R by Anudeep Central Circle-2(4), Nimmatoori, Hyderabad. vs. PAN ACSPN1662R Hyderabad. Nimmatoori Ramesh Babu, Hyderabad. Telangana. PAN ACSPN 1659G Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessees : CA, P. Murali Mohan Rao For Revenue : Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 18.08.2025 Date of Pro…

Late Nimmatoori Rajababu L/R by Anudeep Nimmatoori, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 596/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Respondent: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 269Section 271Section 271DSection 271D(2)Section 273BSection 4

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.594, 596 & 597/Hyd./2025 Assessment Years 2016-2017 & 2017-2018 Late Nimmatoori Raja Babu, Hyderabad. PAN ACSPN1662R The ACIT, Late Nimmatoori Raja Babu, L/R by Anudeep Central Circle-2(4), Nimmatoori, Hyderabad. vs. PAN ACSPN1662R Hyderabad. Nimmatoori Ramesh Babu, Hyderabad. Telangana. PAN ACSPN 1659G Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessees : CA, P. Murali Mohan Rao For Revenue : Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 18.08.2025 Date of Pro…

Nimmatoori Sulochana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 603/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 269Section 271Section 271DSection 271D(2)Section 273B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.Nos.602 & 603/Hyd./2025 Assessment Years 2017-2018 Smt. Nimmatoori The DCIT, Yashoda, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(4), PAN ACSPN1657J vs. Hyderabad. Smt. Nimmatoori Telangana. Sulochana, Hyderabad. PAN ACSPN1664K Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : CA, P. Murali Mohan Rao For Revenue : Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 13.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G. : The above appeals are filed by two different a…

Nimmatoori Yashoda, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 602/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 269Section 271Section 271DSection 271D(2)Section 273B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.Nos.602 & 603/Hyd./2025 Assessment Years 2017-2018 Smt. Nimmatoori The DCIT, Yashoda, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(4), PAN ACSPN1657J vs. Hyderabad. Smt. Nimmatoori Telangana. Sulochana, Hyderabad. PAN ACSPN1664K Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : CA, P. Murali Mohan Rao For Revenue : Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 13.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G. : The above appeals are filed by two different a…

Sundeep Kapila, Himachal Pradesh vs. Additional Commissioner Central, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1069/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohatgi, CA and Shri Rajat Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 147Section 269SSection 271DSection 275(1)(c)

…utes the date of initiation of penalty for the purposes of section 275(1)(c), and not the date of issuance of notice by the JCIT. In support, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Mahesh Wood Products Pvt. Ltd. [(2017) 394 ITR 312 (Del.)] and the decision of the Chennai Bench in DCIT v. Smt. Subramanian Thanu [ITA Nos. 785–788/CHNY/2023, dated 13.03.2024]. 9. On merits, the learned AR submitted that the cash amount of ₹2,80,000/- received by the assessee was not in the nature of a loan or deposit but was earnest money in connection with a property transaction. The transac…

Sundeep Kapila, Himachal Pradesh vs. Additional Commissioner Central, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1068/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohatgi, CA and Shri Rajat Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 147Section 269SSection 271DSection 275(1)(c)

…utes the date of initiation of penalty for the purposes of section 275(1)(c), and not the date of issuance of notice by the JCIT. In support, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Mahesh Wood Products Pvt. Ltd. [(2017) 394 ITR 312 (Del.)] and the decision of the Chennai Bench in DCIT v. Smt. Subramanian Thanu [ITA Nos. 785–788/CHNY/2023, dated 13.03.2024]. 9. On merits, the learned AR submitted that the cash amount of ₹2,80,000/- received by the assessee was not in the nature of a loan or deposit but was earnest money in connection with a property transaction. The transac…

Sundeep Kapila, Himachal Pradesh vs. Additional Commissioner Central, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1067/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohatgi, CA and Shri Rajat Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 147Section 269SSection 271DSection 275(1)(c)

…utes the date of initiation of penalty for the purposes of section 275(1)(c), and not the date of issuance of notice by the JCIT. In support, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Mahesh Wood Products Pvt. Ltd. [(2017) 394 ITR 312 (Del.)] and the decision of the Chennai Bench in DCIT v. Smt. Subramanian Thanu [ITA Nos. 785–788/CHNY/2023, dated 13.03.2024]. 9. On merits, the learned AR submitted that the cash amount of ₹2,80,000/- received by the assessee was not in the nature of a loan or deposit but was earnest money in connection with a property transaction. The transac…

Saluja Construction Company Limited, New Delhi vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-77, Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 3493/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Saluja Construction Company Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 3, Munirka Marg, Range-77, New Delhi – 110 038. Delhi. Pan: Dels02044A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhupinder Jit Kumar, Advocate; Shri Raina Majumdar, Advocate; Shri Nikhil Sharma, Advocate & Shri Tushar Kalra, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Bhupinder Jit Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 201(1)Section 269Section 271Section 271CSection 274Section 275

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Saluja Construction Company Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT, 3, Munirka Marg, Range-77, New Delhi – 110 038. Delhi. PAN: DELS02044A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bhupinder Jit Kumar, Advocate; Shri Raina Majumdar, Advocate; Shri Nikhil Sharma, Advocate & Shri Tushar Kalra, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 02.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is pref…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Kiran Fine Jewellers Pvt Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 274/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.268, 270, 271 & 274/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner of Income बनाम Tax, Central Circle-02, Jaipur Vs. Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Limited F-19, Gautam Marg, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AADCK7512P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CA राजस्व

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…ne 2008, the Additional CIT defeated the very object of Section 275 (1) (c).” It is held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)/[2017] 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) (05-05-2017] as under.- "9. However, this question came up for consideration in JKD Capital &Finlease Ltd. (supra). The date on which the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings was taken to be the relevant date as far as Section 275(1)(c) was concerned. There was no explanation for the delay of nearly five years in the ACIT…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. M/S Kiran Fine Jewellers Pvt Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 271/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.268, 270, 271 & 274/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner of Income बनाम Tax, Central Circle-02, Jaipur Vs. Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Limited F-19, Gautam Marg, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AADCK7512P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CA राजस्व

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…ne 2008, the Additional CIT defeated the very object of Section 275 (1) (c).” It is held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)/[2017] 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) (05-05-2017] as under.- "9. However, this question came up for consideration in JKD Capital &Finlease Ltd. (supra). The date on which the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings was taken to be the relevant date as far as Section 275(1)(c) was concerned. There was no explanation for the delay of nearly five years in the ACIT…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. M/S Kiran Fine Jewellers Pvt Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 270/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…ne 2008, the Additional CIT defeated the very object of Section 275 (1) (c).” It is held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)/[2017] 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) (05-05-2017] as under.- "9. However, this question came up for consideration in JKD Capital &Finlease Ltd. (supra). The date on which the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings was taken to be the relevant date as far as Section 275(1)(c) was concerned. There was no explanation for the delay of nearly five years in the ACIT…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Kiran Fine Jewellers Pvt Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 268/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.268, 270, 271 & 274/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner of Income बनाम Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Tax, Vs. Limited Central Circle-02, Jaipur F-19, Gautam Marg, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AADCK7512P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri R. K. Bhatra, CA राजस्व की

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…ne 2008, the Additional CIT defeated the very object of Section 275 (1) (c).” It is held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. Mahesh Wood Products (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)/[2017] 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) (05-05-2017] as under.- "9. However, this question came up for consideration in JKD Capital &Finlease Ltd. (supra). The date on which the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings was taken to be the relevant date as far as Section 275(1)(c) was concerned. There was no explanation for the delay of nearly five years in the ACIT…

Manish Sharma, Kota vs. JCIT, Central Circle, Udaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 619/JODH/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Date Of Hearing.

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR. BEFORE: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 619/Jodh/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Manish Sharma Vs. The JCIT, 309, Masjid Road, Keshavpura, Central Circle, Kota. Udaipur. PAN/GIR No.: AWUPS7536B Appellant Respondent Appellant by Sh. Gopichand Saraswat, C.A. Sh. Karni Dan, Addl.CIT (Sr.DR Respondent by Date of Hearing 07/05/2025 25/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (Appeals), Udaipur-2 dated…

Ajay Bakliwal, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1278/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 275(1)(c)

…on July 23, 2012 and the last date for passing the penalty orders was January 31, 2013. Therefore, the penalty orders issued on February 26, 2013 were barred by limitation. No question of law arose. (AY. 2009- 10) PCIT v. Mahesh Wood Products Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 394 ITR 312/154 DTR 154 (Delhi) (HC) Further it may be clarified that the provisions contained u/s 275(1)(a) have got no relevance and are not applicable on the facts of this case because the completion of the appellate proceedings whether arising from assessment or any other proceedings during which penalty proceedings for S.271D and 271E are initiated have…

ITO, TDS Ward-75(2), New Delhi vs. Kushal Infra Project Industries India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8071/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Naveen Chandraito, Tds Vs. M/S. Kushal Infra Project Ward – 75(2), Industries India Ltd. Aayakar Bhawn, Lakshmi 209, Uday Plaza, 16-A, Nagar, New Delhi -110 092 Uday Park, New Delhi-110 049 Pan : Aacck 3933 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ragini Handa, Adv. Respondent By Shri Dayainder Singh, Sidhu, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 30.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 17.01.2025 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar:

Section 143(3)Section 192(1)Section 2(14)Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)Section 275(1)(c)Section 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO, TDS Vs. M/s. Kushal Infra Project Ward – 75(2), Industries India Ltd. Aayakar Bhawn, Lakshmi 209, Uday Plaza, 16-A, Nagar, New Delhi -110 092 Uday Park, New Delhi-110 049 PAN : AACCK 3933 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Ragini Handa, Adv. Respondent by Shri Dayainder Singh, Sidhu, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 30.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 17.01.2025 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER : 1. The appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is agains…

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-2 Delhi vs. Turner General Entertainment Networks India Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA - 547 / 2024HC Delhi06 Nov 2024
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 271CSection 275(1)(c)

…ITA 547/2024 Page 1 of 8 $~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision :06.11.2024 + ITA 547/2024 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)-2 DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate versus TURNER GENERAL ENTERTAINMENT NETWORKS INDIA PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manuj Sabharwal, Mr. Drona Negi and Mr. Devrat Tiwari, Advocates…

Vimal Todi, Indore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore

Appeals are allowed

ITA 190/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 269SSection 271D

…decisions where the starting point for the purpose of section 275(1)(c) had been construed as the date on which the AO wrote letter to the Competent Officer recommending issuance of showcause notice: (a) PCIT Vs. Mahesh Wood Products Private Limited (2017) 394 ITR 312 (Delhi) (b) PCIT Vs. JKD Capital & Finlease Ltd. (2015) 378 ITR 614 (Delhi) (c) PCIT Vs. Rishikesh Buildcon Private Limited (2023) 451 ITR 108 (Delhi) 12. With these submissions, Ld. AR prayed to quash the penalty-orders as time-barred. 13. Per contra, Ld. DR submitted that in Para 20.5 of assessment-order, there is no initiation of penalty-pr…