Smt. Rupali R. Desai v. Addl. CIT

88 ITD 76Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#16255 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Judgments citing Smt. Rupali R. Desai v. Addl. CIT

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 206/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

…and the taxpayer could not get a loan or deposit by account-payee cheque or demand draft for some bona fide reason, the authority vested with the power to impose penalty had a discretion not to levy penalty. In the case of Smt. Rupali R. Desai Vs. Addl. CIT (88 ITD 76), the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal held that the section 269SS was introduced to prevent abuse of laws and to discourage tax avoidance and tax evasion. In particular, it was meant to circumvent the device by which the taxpayers often explained away unaccounted cash or unaccounted deposits found in the course of searches carried out by the Department. In…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 205/CTK/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2009-10
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

…and the taxpayer could not get a loan or deposit by account-payee cheque or demand draft for some bona fide reason, the authority vested with the power to impose penalty had a discretion not to levy penalty. In the case of Smt. Rupali R. Desai Vs. Addl. CIT (88 ITD 76), the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal held that the section 269SS was introduced to prevent abuse of laws and to discourage tax avoidance and tax evasion. In particular, it was meant to circumvent the device by which the taxpayers often explained away unaccounted cash or unaccounted deposits found in the course of searches carried out by the Department. In…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SATVINDER SINGH WADHAWAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal No

ITA 3081/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271Section 271DSection 271E

…SS applies only where money passes from one person to another by way of 'loan or deposit’[CIT v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. 262 ITR 260 (Del.)] A genuine transaction made in an emergency, does not attract penalty u/s 271D: held in Mrs Rupali R. Desai v. ACIT 88 ITD 76 (Mum.). In ITO v. Shree Mahaveer Industries 82 TTJ 549 (Jd.) it was held that cash paid to meet medical treatment expenditure in emergency, does not attract penalty u/s 271D. In ITO v. Prabhulal Sahu [2006] 99 TTJ (Jd.) 177 it was held that Assessee was not aware of provisions of section 269SS or 269T. His councel did not apprise him about the pro…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SATVINDER SINGH WASHAWAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal No

ITA 3082/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271Section 271DSection 271E

…SS applies only where money passes from one person to another by way of 'loan or deposit’[CIT v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. 262 ITR 260 (Del.)] A genuine transaction made in an emergency, does not attract penalty u/s 271D: held in Mrs Rupali R. Desai v. ACIT 88 ITD 76 (Mum.). In ITO v. Shree Mahaveer Industries 82 TTJ 549 (Jd.) it was held that cash paid to meet medical treatment expenditure in emergency, does not attract penalty u/s 271D. In ITO v. Prabhulal Sahu [2006] 99 TTJ (Jd.) 177 it was held that Assessee was not aware of provisions of section 269SS or 269T. His councel did not apprise him about the pro…

SHIV SHARAN TRADING P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 4(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2154/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/2154/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Shiv Sharan Trading Pvt. Ltd. Acit-Range-4(3) Shop No.3, Building No.136, Mumbai-400 058. Vs. Kalbadevi, Vithalwadi, Mumbai-400 002. Pan:Aajcs 9593 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: Shri Atul Mehta सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 03.01.2013 Of The Cit(A)-8,Mumbai, The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year.Assessee Is Engaged In Renting Out Of Various Commercial Properties.The Return Of Income Was Processed On 23-07-2009.Assessment U/S.143 (3)R.W.S. 147 Of The Act,Was Completed On 30.09.2011,Assessing Its Income At Rs.7,31, 501/-.

For Appellant: Shri Atul MehtaFor Respondent: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 143Section 254(1)Section 269SSection 271D

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ई” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,"याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/2154/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Shiv Sharan Trading Pvt. Ltd. ACIT-Range-4(3) Shop No.3, Building No.136, Mumbai-400 058. Vs. Kalbadevi, Vithalwa…

MARTIN ALEX CORREA,MUMBAI vs. JCIT RG 24(2), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2507/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Saktijit Deyआमकय अऩीर सं. / Ita No.2507/Mum./2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007–08) Shri Martin Alex Correa 3/7, Joseph Cottage …….………. अऩीरधथी / Chincholi, Bunder Road Appellant Malad (W), Mumbai 400 064 Pan – Aagpc1700M V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax ..…….………. प्रत्मथी / Range–24(4), Bandra (E), Mumbai Respondent ननधधारयती की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah यधजस्व की ओय से / Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra सुनवधई की तधयीख / आदेश घोषणध की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing – 24.09.2015 Date Of Order – 09.10.2015

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 269SSection 271D

…of unaccounted money. In case of assessee, since the transaction is genuine and no unaccounted cash was introduced, the provisions of section 269SS of the Act are not applicable. In this context, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) Smt. Rupali Desai, 88 ITD 76 (Mum.)(TM); and ii) Eetachi Agencies, 248 ITR 525. Shri Martin Alex Correa 5 He submitted that the amount of ` 2.50 lakh was advanced by Ms. Edna Misquitta, suo–motu for meeting expenses to be incurred on her behalf, hence, it is not in the nature of loan, therefore, penalty under section 271D of the Act cannot be imposed. For such proposition, he…

Smt. Rupali R. Desai v. Addl. CIT (88 ITD 76) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax