Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu

23 VST 249Supreme Court of India2009#1372 most cited

What is Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu authority for?

Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars is not attracted merely because some items are not included in the tax return or the return contains incorrect statements, provided these transactions are fully incorporated and reflected in the assessee's account books.

83

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sree Krishna Electricals · section 271(1)(c) penalty · furnishing inaccurate particulars · deletion of penalty · disclosure in account books · items not included in return · incorrect statements in return · true and full disclosure · section 274 · section 276C

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 274Section 276CSection 250Section 115JBSection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 276csection 276section 270a(6)(a)section 40a(2)(a)section 115jcsection 270a(6)true and full disclosuredeletion of penaltyagency pepenalty under section 271(1)(c)section 24(a)section 92d

Judgments citing Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu

CHARTERED SPEED LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2286/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member ITA No: 2286/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Chartered Speed Limited The DCIT, S. No. 474, Sarkhej Circle-1(1)(1), Bavla Highway, Vs Ahmedabad Sanathal Circle, Sarkhej, Ahmedabad-382210, Gujarat PAN: AADCC0802E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Atik Jain, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Abhijit, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 21-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 28-01-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER: T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is…

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2175/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…Assessing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. 11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. Thi…

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA\nNo

ITA 2174/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…ssing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under\nsection 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature.\n\n11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna\nElectricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the\npenalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained\nto the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the\nCourt had found that the authorities below had found that there were\nsome incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said\n\n14\nITA Nos.2169 to 2175/PUN/2025\n\ntransactions were re…

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2173/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…Assessing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. 11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. Thi…

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2172/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…Assessing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. 11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. Thi…

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA\nNo

ITA 2171/PUN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…ssing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under\nsection 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature.\n\n11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna\nElectricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the\npenalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained\nto the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the\nCourt had found that the authorities below had found that there were\nsome incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said\n\ntransactions were reflected in the accounts of the assess…

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2170/PUN/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…Assessing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. 11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. Thi…

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,SHIROL vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2169/PUN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

…Assessing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. 11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. Thi…

ROHINI MARUTI DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 1839/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 54B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.Nos.1837 to 1839/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year 2015-2016) 1. Amol Vasant Deshmukh ITO, Ward-6(2), Pune PAN : ASAPD 8899 C Tulsabai Vasant Deshmukh 2. vs. PAN : AWQPD 9715 M Rohini Maruti Deshmukh 3. PAN : BHKPD 1741 F All r/o Flat No.104, F-Wing, Madhukosh Society, Lagad Mala, Sinhagad Road, Wadgaon Khurd, Pune Maharashtra-411041 (Appellants) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sarang Gudhate, CA For Revenue : Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT Date of Hearing : 11.12.2025 Date o…

TULSABAI VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 1838/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 54B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.Nos.1837 to 1839/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year 2015-2016) 1. Amol Vasant Deshmukh ITO, Ward-6(2), Pune PAN : ASAPD 8899 C Tulsabai Vasant Deshmukh 2. vs. PAN : AWQPD 9715 M Rohini Maruti Deshmukh 3. PAN : BHKPD 1741 F All r/o Flat No.104, F-Wing, Madhukosh Society, Lagad Mala, Sinhagad Road, Wadgaon Khurd, Pune Maharashtra-411041 (Appellants) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sarang Gudhate, CA For Revenue : Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT Date of Hearing : 11.12.2025 Date o…

AMOL VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 1837/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 54B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.Nos.1837 to 1839/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year 2015-2016) 1. Amol Vasant Deshmukh ITO, Ward-6(2), Pune PAN : ASAPD 8899 C Tulsabai Vasant Deshmukh 2. vs. PAN : AWQPD 9715 M Rohini Maruti Deshmukh 3. PAN : BHKPD 1741 F All r/o Flat No.104, F-Wing, Madhukosh Society, Lagad Mala, Sinhagad Road, Wadgaon Khurd, Pune Maharashtra-411041 (Appellants) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sarang Gudhate, CA For Revenue : Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT Date of Hearing : 11.12.2025 Date o…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

…g inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such claim made in the Return cannot amount to the inaccurate particulars 11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr. [(2009) 23 VST 249 (SC) as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. SURESH MANEKLAL SHETH, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4560/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Swapnil Choudhary Sr. ARFor Respondent: 30.10.2025
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 4560/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) Income Tax Officer, Mumbai Suresh Maneklal Sheth Room No. 126, 1st Floor, Kautilya 1 Kusum Niwas, Irla Vile Parle (W), Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla Vs. Mumbai 400056 Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 PAN: AJMPS0119H Appellant) : Respondent) : Shri Prateek Jain Assessee by : Shri. Swapnil Choudhary Sr. AR Revenue by : 30.10.2025 Date of Hearing : 11.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM: This appeal by the revenue is aga…

CONWOOD CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), MUMBAI

ITA 4756/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 270(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Conwood Construction Vs. DCIT Central Circle- 1(4) 902, 9th Floor, Pratishtha and Developers Private Limited Bhavan, Old CGO Annexe, Dynamix House, Maharishi Karve Road, Yashodham, Goregaon Mumbai- 400020 East, Mumbai- 400063 PAN: AAACA0981F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Ravi Ganatra, Adv. Revenue by Shri. Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 25/09/2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUN…

NARAYANA HRUDAYALAYA LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 246/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Monish Sowkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2012-13 Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner No.258/A, Bommasandra of Income Tax, Industrial Area, Circle 2[3][1], Bengaluru – 560 009. Bengaluru. PAN: AABCN 1685J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Monish Sowkar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President 1. This appeal…

SHRI RAMCHAND LAXMANDAS BABANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 192/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No. 192/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2011-12 Shri Ramchand Laxmandas Babani P.No.2, Shiv Shankar Colony Janta Colony, Jaipur – 302 004 (Raj) बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward -6(4) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ANYPB 6571 A अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे/Assesseeby : Shri Mohit Balani, Advocate (Thru" V.C.) राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Shri Gautam Sin

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, Advocate (Thru” V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…reme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Petroproducts Pvt Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC). The relevant para 11& 12 of the order is reproduced as under:- ‘’11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu(2009) 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. Thi…

URMILA RAJENDRA MUNDRA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

In the result grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 577/JPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(1)

…he assessee will invite penalty under section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. 13 Urmila Rajendra Mundra vs. ITO 11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu[2009] 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. Thi…

DCIT(IT)-3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MUREX SOUTHEAST ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED, SINGAPORE

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1453/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15
Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…essing Officer for any reason, the assessee\nwill invite penalty under section 271(1)(c) That is clearly not the intendment of\nthe Legislature.\n11. In this behalf the observations of this Court made in Sree Krishna Electricals\nv. State of Tamil Nadu (2009) 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite In\nthe aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil\nNadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had\nfound that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return However,\nthe said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee Th…

INTERVALVE POONAWALLA PVT. LTD. ,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 637/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Intervalve Poonawalla Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle 1(1), Fin Div. 16/B-1, Sarosh Bhavan, Pune Vs. 2Nd Floor, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Opp. Niv, Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaaci3917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Vishnu Bhutada Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 14-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04-06-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 4Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2014-15 Intervalve Poonawalla Pvt. Ltd. DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), Fin Div. 16/B-1, Sarosh Bhavan, Pune Vs. 2nd Floor, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Opp. NIV, Pune – 411001 PAN: AAACI3917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Vishnu Bhutada Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 14-05-2025 Date of pronouncement : 04-06-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28…

RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAHAKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1488/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar Giya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 80P

…d was found to be factually incorrect. Hence, at least, prima facie, the assessee cannot be held guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars. In this regard, the observations made by the Supreme Court in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu (2009) 23 VST 249 are highly relevant. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings in Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the Court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the Return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. This Court therefor…

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5