Snita Transport Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

42 Taxmann.com 54High Court2014#2573 most cited

What is Snita Transport Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax authority for?

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars is justified where an assessee discloses additional income after a departmental survey operation has detected irregularities, such as bogus expenditure, compelling the disclosure.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Snita Transport Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT · Section 271(1)(c) penalty · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · disclosure after survey · revised return after detection · Section 133A survey · justification of penalty

Sections most often in play

Section 133ASection 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 271aaasection 153(a)section 139(4)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomepenalty under section 271(1)(c)concealment of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularssection 271aapenalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 271asection 274section 271(1)

Judgments citing Snita Transport Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

The ITO, Ward-2(2)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Jayantilal Mafatlal Prajapati, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1476/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1476/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Talera, A.Rs
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…he disclosure of additional income by the assessee on 31- 3-2007 was after its detection by the department. 12. We find that the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court hi the case of Snita Transport [P] Ltd. V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [2014] 42 Taxmann.com 54 [Gujarat] is not applicable on the facts of the instant case. In that case, the Hon. Gujarat High Court observed that a survey was conducted hi the case of the assessee on 30-1-2003 wherein the assessee accepted in the statement recorded of having debited bogus expenditure in its Books of Account. After the above survey and recording of sta…

Smt. Anjanaben Narendrakumar Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1372/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 54BSection 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2012-13 Anjanaben Narendrakumar The ACIT, Patel, C/203, Utsav Circle-2(2), Residency, New C.G. Vs Ahmedabad-380014 Road, Chandkheda, (Respondent) Ahmedabad PAN: AWFPP4964R (Appellant) Revenue by: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri Pramod Popat, A.R. Date of hearing : 11-03-2019 Date of pronouncement : 13-03-2019 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The solitary ground of appeal of the assessee is against the decision…

Dharmesh Dhulabhai Prajapati, Mehsana vs. The ITO, Mehsana Ward-5, Mehsana

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1570/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Biren V. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jaya Chaudhary, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1570/Ahd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Dharmesh Dhulabhai Vs. Income Tax Officer, Prajapati, 45, Bhagyalaxmi Mehsana Ward – 5, Society, Nr. S. V. Campus, Kadi. At: Kadi, Dist: Mehsana – 382 715. [PAN No. AUKPP 7427 J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Biren V. Shah, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Jaya Chaudhary, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 11.12.2018 Date of Pronouncement 31.01.2019 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal…

Devendra Narendrabhai Thakker, Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, Circle-5(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 762/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 762/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Devendra Narendrabhai Acit, बनाम/ Thakker, Cir – 5(2), Vs. C/O Maffick Logistics, 228, Ahmedabad. Akshar Arcade, Opp. Memnagar Fire Station, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-14 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abfpt 6354 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Jyotish M. Shah, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr.D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Jyotish M. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271Section 274Section 54ESection 54G

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘lh lhlh lh’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD olhe vgen] ys[kk lnL;, के सम"। सव"ी राजपाल यादव "या"यक सद"य एवं olhe vgen] ys[kk lnL olhe vgen] ys[kk lnL olhe vgen] ys[kk lnL BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 762/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Devendra Narendrabhai ACIT, बनाम/ Thakker, Cir – 5(2), Vs. C/o Maffick Logistics, 228, Ahmedabad. Akshar Arcade, Opp. Memnagar Fire Station, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-14 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. :…

Radha Govind Lashkari, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, it cannot be said to be case of concealment of income and the penalty to this extent stand deleted

ITA 141/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S. R. Sharma (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri O.P. Bhateja (Addl.CIT)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

…, therefore, penalty order so passed has to be sustained . Vs. ACIT Circle-2,Jaipur On similar facts, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has sustained penalty order passed u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act in case of M/s Snita Transport (Pvt.) Ltd vs ACIT (2014) reported in 42 Taxmann.com 54/221 Taxman 21 (Mag) (Guj) and Bharatkumar G. Rajni Vs. DCIT (2013) reported in 40 taxmann.com 344 (Guj). Therefore, in view of facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above, concealment of income came to be established and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been rightly levied upon the assessee. Accordingly AO’s action is sustai…