Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. v. CIT

240 ITR 943High Court1999#20051 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,254 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2019.

Judgments citing Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Resurgere Mines and Minerals India Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1531/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA and Shri Ashish Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…erely on the grounds that certain additions ITA No.- 1531/Del/2017. M/s Resurgere Mines and Minerals India Ltd. were made and the same were accepted by the assessee without invoking the Explanation to Section Uls 271 (1)(c)]. v) CIT vs. Inden Bislers (1999) 240 ITR 943, 946, 947 (Madras)[tribunal was held - justified in canceling the penalty where it has recorded a finding that the additions . have' been made because a particular expenditure was not justifiable from a commercial point of view and that there was no evidence of concealment of income). Thus the action of the assessing officer in levying the pena…

Sri Joy Barman, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-42(3), Kolkata

ITA 600/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

…tion does not mean that there has been either fraud or willful neglect so as to justify levy of Penalty. - Reference - CIT vs. Paripusham - 249 ITR 550(Mad) following Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. vs. CIT -168 ITR 705(SC) and CIT vs. Inden Bislers - 240 ITR 943(Mad) followed. ITA No.599-600/Kol/2016 A.Ys 08-09 & 09-10 Sh JoyBarman Vs. ITO Wd-42(3) Kol. Page 11 (d) Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. vs. CIT -168 ITR 705(SC) Assessee agreeing to additions - does not necessarily mean concealment. (e) CIT vs. G. Topi Saheb, SLP (civil no.4167 of 1985) reported in 193 ITR(St.) 28, 29(SC) Cash credit tr…

Sri Joy Barman, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-42(3), Kolkata

ITA 599/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

…tion does not mean that there has been either fraud or willful neglect so as to justify levy of Penalty. - Reference - CIT vs. Paripusham - 249 ITR 550(Mad) following Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. vs. CIT -168 ITR 705(SC) and CIT vs. Inden Bislers - 240 ITR 943(Mad) followed. ITA No.599-600/Kol/2016 A.Ys 08-09 & 09-10 Sh JoyBarman Vs. ITO Wd-42(3) Kol. Page 11 (d) Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. vs. CIT -168 ITR 705(SC) Assessee agreeing to additions - does not necessarily mean concealment. (e) CIT vs. G. Topi Saheb, SLP (civil no.4167 of 1985) reported in 193 ITR(St.) 28, 29(SC) Cash credit tr…

Commissioenr of Income Tax vs. Dr. T. Ravi Kumar

ITTA/399/2011HC Telangana24 Jul 2013
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…be sustained. On the point of penalty on disallowance after appreciation of facts and circumstances of the case, no penalty is exigable as the appellant did not conceal any income or filed inaccurate particulars on income (CIT Vs. Inden Bislers(1999) 240 ITR 943, 46, 947 (Mad) (Trib); CIT vs. D. Ratnam (1995) Tax L R 504, 505. 507 (Mad) (Trib): Cit vs. Jagdish are Bhandar (1996) 84 Taxman 92, 93 (ALL) (Trib) : CIT vs. M P. Narayanan (1998) Tax LR 882, 886, 887 ( Mad) (Trib); CIT vs. M. P. Narayanan (1998) Tax Lr 882, 886, 887 ( Mad) (Trib): and CIT vs. Po;ular Lunghi Co. (1998) 147 CTR(Mad)46…

Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. v. CIT (240 ITR 943) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax