Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills

13 SCC 448Reported decision2009#1241 most cited

What is Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills authority for?

For the imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c), the specific conditions laid down in the section must be demonstrably met. The assessee's filed return is the primary document for furnishing income particulars, and inaccuracies therein are crucial for penalty imposition.

91

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills · section 271(1)(c) · penalty · conditions for penalty · inaccurate particulars of income · return filed · furnishing particulars of income

Sections most often in play

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

Issues it is cited on

section 276csection 276section 270a(6)(a)section 40a(2)(a)section 115jcsection 270a(6)true and full disclosureagency pesection 24(a)section 92dpenalty under section 271(1)(c)section 271aab

Judgments citing Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills

DCIT, Sonepat vs. M/S Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd., Sonepat

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 2491/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…h income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Page 64 of 70 Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Sonepat 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(l)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Retu…

DCIT, Sonepat vs. M/S Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd., Sonepat

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 2490/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…h income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Page 64 of 70 Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Sonepat 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(l)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Retu…

DCIT, Sonepat vs. M/S Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd., Sonepat

In the result ITA Nos. 2489/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 2489/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…h income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Page 64 of 70 Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Sonepat 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(l)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Retu…

DCIT, Sonepat vs. Shri Atlas Cycles Haryana Ltd., Sonepat

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 10/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…h income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Page 64 of 70 Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Sonepat 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(l)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Retu…

ACIT, Sonepat vs. M/S. Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd., Sonepat

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 913/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…h income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Page 64 of 70 Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Sonepat 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(l)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Retu…

M/S. Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd., Sonepat vs. ACIT, Haryana

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 784/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…h income. This Court referred to another decision of this Court in Union of India v. Page 64 of 70 Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Sonepat 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(l)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Retu…

Rathi Pragati Steel Manufacturing Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1533/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amrit Lal, Sr-DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…f great controversy. Finally, after referring to the decisions in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs JCIT & Another, 291 ITR 519, Union of India vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as well as Union of India vs Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd, 322 ITR 158, has recently held as under: “A glance at the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, suggests that in order to be covered by it, there has to be concealment of the particulars of the income of the assessee. Secondly, the assessee m…

Qpro Infotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2197/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 Qpro Infotech Ltd., Dcit 2(3) Ratnajyot 1-B, Mumbai बनाम/ Pushpam, 30E, Vs. Cawasji Patel Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaacq0953H Appellant By Shri Dharmesh Shah ( Ar) Revenue By Capt. Pradeep S. Arya ( Sr. Dr)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…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. & Mg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in paragraph 13 that (page 13 of 317 ITR): "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed.” 3.9. In the facts of the case before us noth…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Cifco Properties P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6007/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 271(1)(c)

…ther decision of this Court in Union of India vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors (2007) 212 CTR (SC) 432 : (2008) 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union of India vs. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills (2009) 224 CTR (SC) 1 : (2009) 23 DTR (SC) 158: (2009) 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that: "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of s. 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." 8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under s. 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the return filed beca…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Cifco Properties P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6006/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 271(1)(c)

…ther decision of this Court in Union of India vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors (2007) 212 CTR (SC) 432 : (2008) 13 SCC 369, as also, the decision in Union of India vs. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills (2009) 224 CTR (SC) 1 : (2009) 23 DTR (SC) 158: (2009) 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that: "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of s. 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." 8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under s. 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the return filed beca…

DCIT, Faridabad vs. Smt. Parminder Chadha, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 716/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2008-09 The D.C.I.T. Vs. Shri Parminder Chadha Circle - 1 10, Mathura Road Faridabad Jangpura, New Delhi Pan : Aadpc 7936 Q Q [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 31.05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2016 Appellant By : Shri R.S. Negi, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Shri Sanjeev Puri, Ca

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Negi, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Puri, CA
Section 142(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…f great controversy. Finally, after referring to the decisions in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs JCIT & Another, 291 ITR 519, Union of India vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369, as well as Union of 5 India vs Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd, 322 ITR 158, has recently held as under: “A glance at the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, suggests that in order to be covered by it, there has to be concealment of the particulars of the income of the assessee. Secondly, the assessee mu…

Shree Cental Silk Mills, Mumbai vs. ITO 14(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5359/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos.5359 To 5361/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11 M/S. Shree Central Silk The Ito 14(3)(2), बनाम/ Mills, 6Th Floor, Earnest House, Vs. 673, Madhavrai Lane, Mumbai-400 021 M.J. Market, Mumbai-400 02 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aatfs 7036H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Assessee By: Shri Dhirendra M. Shah Shri Vishwas Jadhav ""यथ" क" ओर से/Revenue By:

For Appellant: Shri Dhirendra M. Shah
Section 148Section 24Section 271(1)(c)

…come or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This court referred to another decision of this court in Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008J 13 SCC 3692 as also, the decision in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [2009] 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in paragraph 13 that (page 13 of 317 ITR) : It goes without saying that for applicability of Sec. 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exists.” 12. Thus in view of the above discussion we hold that assessee has not concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. What we see in the computation, is only the…

ACIT 12(3), Mumbai vs. Lemuir Air Express, Mumbai

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 3055/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji-ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Bepari-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 54E

…ome 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: (Atul Mohan Bindal case [(2009) 9 SCC 589] , SCC p. 597, para 13) "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of Section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." 12. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under Section 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. T…

Ami Builders P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 5(1), Mumbai

ITA 803/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri R.S.SinghviFor Respondent: Dr. Pramod Nikalje (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 371(1)

…sion is a civil liability." (extract from the order levying penalty emphasis supplied) 9.1.1 In this regard we would like to humbly bring forth before your honor the decision of the Honorable SC in the case of Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills reported in 180 Taxmann 609 which has been pronounced after the decision in the case of Dharmendra textile processors has been delivered. The Honorable Apex Court has very clearly laid down that willful concealment or fraud is an essential condition for levy of penalty. The Honorable SC observed that the revenue has not understood the implication of Dharrnendra textile…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Srf Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3848/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Ms. Anima Bernwal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Satyen Sethi, Adv
Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT, AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3848/Del /2013 Assessment Year: 2006-07 The D.C.I.T Vs. M/s SRF Limited Central Circle – 9(1) Block C, Sector - 45 New Delhi Gurgaon PAN : AAACS 0206 P [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 09.02.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 19.02.2016 Appellant by : Ms. Anima Bernwal, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri Satyen Sethi, Adv. Shri Tarun Pandey, Adv ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of…

Jdit, New Delhi vs. M/S. Voith Siemens Hydro Kraftwersketechnik Gmbh & Co., Kg, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5075/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Dudeja, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh.Rajan Bhatia, CA
Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44BSection 44D

…ome 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 paragraph 13 that (page 13 of 317 ITR) : "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." 9. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything…

ACIT 15(3), Mumbai vs. Neelkanth Palm Realty, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3922/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Gyneshwar KataramFor Respondent: Shri S.R.Kirtane
Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…ome 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 paragraph 13 that (page 13 of 317 ITR) : "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." 33. In the case of CIT v. Bacardi Martini India Ltd. [2007J 288 ITR 585 1, a Division Bench of this Court held that merely because there was a difference of opinion between the a…

Commissioner of Income Tax V vs. C Eswar Reddy AND Co

ITTA/452/2015HC Telangana22 Dec 2015

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

New Holland Tractors (India) Private Limited

ITA/182/2002HC Delhi25 Sept 2014
Section 271(1)(c)

…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 inUnion of India v. Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills [(2009) 13 SCC 448] and reiterated in para 13 that: (Atul Mohan Bindal case [(2009) 9 SCC 589] , SCC p. 597, para 13) ―13. It goes without saying that for applicability of Section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist.‖ 12. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the 2014:DHC:5004-DB ITA Nos. 182/2002 & 255/2003…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd

ITA/586/2014HC Delhi11 Sept 2014
Section 10Section 13Section 2Section 2(7)Section 8(2)

…ished 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 paragraph 13 that : "13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." 9. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 2014:DHC:4588-DB ITA No. 586/2014…