Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors

13 SCC 369Supreme Court of India2008#733 most cited

What is Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors authority for?

For the applicability of Section 271(1)(c) penalty, the Assessing Officer must be satisfied that the assessee concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars; however, this satisfaction is not required to be recorded in a particular manner or reduced to writing.

139

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors · Dharamendra Textile Processors · Section 271(1)(c) penalty · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · AO satisfaction for penalty · recording satisfaction · conditions for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) · scope of Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274.

Also reported as

174 Taxmann 57295 ITR 2441

Sections most often in play

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

Issues it is cited on

section 276csection 276section 40a(2)(a)penalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particularssection 271aabconcealment of incomesection 274penalty u/s 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomesection 271(1)commissioner (appeals)

Judgments citing Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors

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)

…ssessing Officer has to be satisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that :— "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions stated therein must exist." 8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before…

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 has to be\nsatisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or\nfurnished inaccurate particulars of his income. This Court referred to\nanother decision of this Court in Union of India v. Dharamendra\nTextile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union\nof India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and\nreiterated in para 13 that :—\n\"13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c),\nconditions stated therein must exist.\"\n\n8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions\nunder section 271(1)(c) must exi…

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)

…ssessing Officer has to be satisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that :— "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions stated therein must exist." 8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before…

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)

…ssessing Officer has to be satisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that :— "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions stated therein must exist." 8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before…

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)

…sing Officer has to be\nsatisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or\nfurnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This Court referred to\nanother decision of this Court in Union of India v. Dharamendra\nTextile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union\nof India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and\nreiterated in para 13 that :—\n\n\"13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c),\nconditions stated therein must exist.\"\n\n8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions\nunder section 271(1)(c) must e…

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)

…ssessing Officer has to be satisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that :— "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions stated therein must exist." 8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before…

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)

…ssessing Officer has to be satisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that :— "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions stated therein must exist." 8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before…

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…

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

ITA 1454/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Rajnikant Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR (Thru: V.C)
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ssing Officer has to be satisfied that a person\nhas concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of\nsuch income. This court referred to another decision of this court in Union of\nIndia v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369 as also, the\ndecision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and\nreiterated in paragraph 13 that:\n\"13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)(c), conditions\nstated therein must exist.\"\nTherefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section\n271(1)(c) must exist b…

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 has to be satisfied that a\nperson has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate\nparticulars of such income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court\nin Union of India v Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as\nalso, the decision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg & Wvg Mills [2009] 13\nSCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that-\n“13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1) c),\nconditions stated therein must exist.\"\n8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section\n271(1)(c) must exist befor…

SHRI ANANTANATH ALPASANKHYATAR VIVIDH UDDESHAGAL SOUHARD SAHAKARI SANGH NIY,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

ITA 6/PAN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 006/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Anantanath Alpasankhyatar Vivid Uddheshagal Souhardha Sahakari Sangh Niyamit [‘Saavusssn’] 1738, Anantnath Building, Jain Galli, Main Rd., Kannur Niyamit Kalloli, Kalloli, Belagavi. Pan : Aagts1962B . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Gokak, Belagavi. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Sachin Nichal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Deshmukh Prakash [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 02/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Appeal Is Filed Against Din & Order 1070608483(1) Dt. 25/11/2024 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Penalty Dt. 23/03/2022 Passed U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act By The National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi [‘Ld. Nfeac’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2009-10 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Sachin Nichal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Deshmukh Prakash [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(4)

…ntion in claiming a status as ‘co-operative society’ as against ‘Trust’ indicated by PAN is apparent, admitted and need not to be proved further for levying penalty in view of the Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in ‘UOI Vs Dharamendra Textile Processors’ [2008, 13 SCC 369 (SC)]. Per contra, relying on the decision of Ld. Co-ordinate bench in ‘ITA No 1626/Ban/2024 dt. 29/11/2024’ the appellant tried to displace Revenue’s right to impose penalty on twofold contentions; (i) the claim for deduction u/s 80P(2) is highly debatable and (ii) the appellant was under bonafide belief while furnishing the particulars in the re…

ANATEK SERVICES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 368/MUM/2025[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2002-03
Section 133Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…t proceedings and the AO is not required to record his satisfaction\nin a particular manner or reduce it into writing. The scope of Section 271(l)(c) has also\nbeen elaborately discussed by this Court in Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile\nProcessors [2008] 13 SCC 369 and CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal [2009] 9 SCC 589.\n11. The principle laid down by this Court, in our view, has been correctly followed by the\nRevenue and we find no illegality in the department initiating penalty proceedings in the\ninstant case. We, therefore, fully agree with the view of the High Court. Hence, the appeal\nlacks merit and is dismis…

ANATEK SERVICES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 367/MUM/2025[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2001-02
Section 133Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…t proceedings and the AO is not required to record his satisfaction\nin a particular manner or reduce it into writing. The scope of Section 271(l)(c) has also\nbeen elaborately discussed by this Court in Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile\nProcessors [2008] 13 SCC 369 and CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal [2009] 9 SCC 589.\n11. The principle laid down by this Court, in our view, has been correctly followed by the\nRevenue and we find no illegality in the department initiating penalty proceedings in the\ninstant case. We, therefore, fully agree with the view of the High Court. Hence, the appeal\nlacks merit and is dismis…

ANATEK SERVICES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -14(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 366/MUM/2025[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Haridas BhatFor Respondent: Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (SR. DR.)
Section 133Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ment proceedings and the AO is not required to record his satisfaction in a particular manner or reduce it into writing. The scope of Section 271(l)(c) has also been elaborately discussed by this Court in Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369 and CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal [2009] 9 SCC 589. 11. The principle laid down by this Court, in our view, has been correctly followed by the Revenue and we find no illegality in the department initiating penalty proceedings in the instant case. We, therefore, fully agree with the view of the High Court. Hence, the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.…

CORNERSTONE ONDEMAND LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(IT)-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5677/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 3747/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 3751/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) I.T.A. No. 3753/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) I.T.A. No. 3752/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) I.T.A. No. 5677/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, ACIT (IT)-2(1)(1), 14th Floor, The Ruby, 17th Floor, Air India Building, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Nariman Point, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. PAN: AAGCC3428B Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by…

CONNERSTONE ONDEMAND LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3753/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 3747/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 3751/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) I.T.A. No. 3753/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) I.T.A. No. 3752/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) I.T.A. No. 5677/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, ACIT (IT)-2(1)(1), 14th Floor, The Ruby, 17th Floor, Air India Building, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Nariman Point, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. PAN: AAGCC3428B Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by…

CORNERSTONE ONDEMAND LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3752/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 3747/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 3751/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) I.T.A. No. 3753/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) I.T.A. No. 3752/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) I.T.A. No. 5677/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, ACIT (IT)-2(1)(1), 14th Floor, The Ruby, 17th Floor, Air India Building, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Nariman Point, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. PAN: AAGCC3428B Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by…

CORNERSTONE ONDEMAND LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3751/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 3747/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 3751/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) I.T.A. No. 3753/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) I.T.A. No. 3752/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) I.T.A. No. 5677/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, ACIT (IT)-2(1)(1), 14th Floor, The Ruby, 17th Floor, Air India Building, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Nariman Point, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. PAN: AAGCC3428B Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by…

Showing 1–20 of 139 · Page 1 of 7