Sandeep Chandak & Ors. v. CIT

55 ITR (Trib) 209Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#2374 most cited

What is Sandeep Chandak & Ors. v. CIT authority for?

The penalty provisions under Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act are not mandatory, as indicated by the use of the word 'may' instead of 'shall', giving the Assessing Officer discretion whether to initiate and impose the penalty.

49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sandeep Chandak & Ors. v. CIT · Section 271AAB · penalty under section 271AAB · discretionary penalty · AO discretion · ITAT Lucknow · not mandatory penalty

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271AABSection 44AA

Issues it is cited on

section 158bfasection 271(1b)section 44bbbsection 271aab(1)section 44aepenalty under section 271aabsection 271aab(1a)section 44bbspeculative transactionsection 44bsection 270a(6)section 270a(2)

Judgments citing Sandeep Chandak & Ors. v. CIT

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Pradip Kumar Agarwala, Kolkata

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

ITA 1478/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 274

…Sybhas Chandra Agarwala & Pradip Kr. Agarwala, AY- 2013-14 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A. No. 1474/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Subhas Chandra Agarwala Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: ABUPA6863G) Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 1478/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Pradip Kumar Agarwala Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (P…

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Subhas Candra Agarwala, Guwahati

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

ITA 1474/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 274

…Sybhas Chandra Agarwala & Pradip Kr. Agarwala, AY- 2013-14 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A. No. 1474/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Subhas Chandra Agarwala Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: ABUPA6863G) Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 1478/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Pradip Kumar Agarwala Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (P…

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Agam Saran Khemka, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1477/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 271A

…Sanwar Mal Agarwala & Agam Saran Khemka, AY- 2013-14 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A. No. 1472/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Sanwar Mal Agarwala Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: ADTPA5153E) Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 1477/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Agtam Saran Khemka Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: AFNPK3645K…

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Sanwar Mal Agarwala, Guwahati

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1472/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 271A

…Sanwar Mal Agarwala & Agam Saran Khemka, AY- 2013-14 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A. No. 1472/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Sanwar Mal Agarwala Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: ADTPA5153E) Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 1477/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Agtam Saran Khemka Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: AFNPK3645K…

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Manoj Beswal, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1476/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1471/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Amit Agarwal [Pan: Abwpa 7376 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1475/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Madan Lal Beswal [Pan: Adbpb 8910 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1476/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Manoj Beswal [Pan: Adbpb 8909 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tiwari, CITFor Respondent: Shri M.D.Shah, AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 2Section 271ASection 274

…ether to initiate and impose penalty u/s. 271AAB of the Act. We agree with the said contention of Ld. AR because when a similar issue was adjudicated by ITAT Lucknow (the author of this order was a member of the Bench) in Sandeep Chandak & Ors. Vs. CIT (2017) 55 ITR (Trib) 209 and 2017 (5) TMI 675- ITAT-Lucknow in ITA No. 416, 417 and 418/LKW/2016 dated 30.01.2017 while adjudicating a case where penalty was levied under section 271AAB of the Act it was held that the provisions of Sec. 271AAB of the Act are not mandatory, which means that penalty need not be levied in each and every case wherever the assessee has…

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Madan Lal Beswal, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1475/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1471/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Amit Agarwal [Pan: Abwpa 7376 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1475/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Madan Lal Beswal [Pan: Adbpb 8910 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1476/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Manoj Beswal [Pan: Adbpb 8909 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tiwari, CITFor Respondent: Shri M.D.Shah, AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 2Section 271ASection 274

…ether to initiate and impose penalty u/s. 271AAB of the Act. We agree with the said contention of Ld. AR because when a similar issue was adjudicated by ITAT Lucknow (the author of this order was a member of the Bench) in Sandeep Chandak & Ors. Vs. CIT (2017) 55 ITR (Trib) 209 and 2017 (5) TMI 675- ITAT-Lucknow in ITA No. 416, 417 and 418/LKW/2016 dated 30.01.2017 while adjudicating a case where penalty was levied under section 271AAB of the Act it was held that the provisions of Sec. 271AAB of the Act are not mandatory, which means that penalty need not be levied in each and every case wherever the assessee has…

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Amit Agarwal, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1471/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1471/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Amit Agarwal [Pan: Abwpa 7376 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1475/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Madan Lal Beswal [Pan: Adbpb 8910 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1476/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit,Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Manoj Beswal [Pan: Adbpb 8909 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tiwari, CITFor Respondent: Shri M.D.Shah, AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 2Section 271ASection 274

…ether to initiate and impose penalty u/s. 271AAB of the Act. We agree with the said contention of Ld. AR because when a similar issue was adjudicated by ITAT Lucknow (the author of this order was a member of the Bench) in Sandeep Chandak & Ors. Vs. CIT (2017) 55 ITR (Trib) 209 and 2017 (5) TMI 675- ITAT-Lucknow in ITA No. 416, 417 and 418/LKW/2016 dated 30.01.2017 while adjudicating a case where penalty was levied under section 271AAB of the Act it was held that the provisions of Sec. 271AAB of the Act are not mandatory, which means that penalty need not be levied in each and every case wherever the assessee has…

DCIT, Cen. Cir-2(2), Kolkata vs. Subhas Candra Agarwala & Sons, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1470/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1470/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Cc-2(2), Kolkata -Vs- Subhas Chandra Agarwala & Sons (Huf) [Pan: Aahhs 0407 G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Hangshing, CITFor Respondent: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1470/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2013-14 DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata -vs- Subhas Chandra Agarwala & Sons (HUF) [PAN: AAHHS 0407 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri G. Hangshing, CIT For the Respondent : Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR Date of Hearing : 14.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-20, Kolkata dated 14.09.2015 for AY 2013-14 by which he dele…

DCIT, CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. Manish Agarwala, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1479/KOL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 274

…ether to initiate and impose penalty u/s. 271AAB of the Act. We agree with the said contention of Ld. AR because when a similar issue was adjudicated by ITAT Lucknow (the author of this order was a member of the Bench) in Sandeep Chandak & Ors. Vs. CIT (2017) 55 ITR (Trib) 209 and 2017 (5) TMI 675-ITAT- Lucknow in ITA No. 416, 417 and 418/LKW/2016 dated 30.01.2017 while adjudicating a case where penalty was levied under section 271AAB of the Act it was held that the provisions of Sec. 271AAB of the Act are not mandatory, which means that penalty need not be levied in each and every case wherever the assessee has…