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

Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III vs. M/S. Anant Overseas P. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/479/2014HC Delhi04 Sept 2014
Section 153CSection 271Section 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 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 imp…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Makino Asia Pvt Ltd

ITA/340/2007HC Karnataka25 Sept 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 260Section 271(1)(c)Section 72

…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.” 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 eve…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Bpl Sanyo Finance Ltd

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA/652/2006HC Karnataka11 Sept 2013

Bench: The Tribunal Was Arising From The Order Dated 4Th June 2004 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Bangalore (For Short “The

Section 115JSection 133Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…r 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.” 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…

CIT vs. Fortis Financial Service

ITA/244/2011HC Delhi05 Jul 2012

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 13

…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 : "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 would dep…

CIT vs. Fortis Financial Service

ITA - 243 / 2011HC Delhi05 Jul 2012
Section 13

…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 : "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 would dep…

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV

ITA/243/2011HC Delhi05 Jul 2012
Section 13

…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 : "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 would dep…

Karan Raghav Exports Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/1152/2011HC Delhi14 Mar 2012
Section 260ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…rnished 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." 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…

M/s. De vs. ons Pvt. Ltd

ITA/296/2006HC Delhi29 Nov 2010
Section 133(6)Section 271

…shed inaccurate particulars of such income. This court referred to another decision of this court in Union of India vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369 as also, the decision in Union of India vs. 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.” 2010:DHC:5727-DB ITA No.367/2004 & 296/2006 Page 37 of 42 33. In the case of Commission…

M/S De vs. Ons Pvt Ltdvs.Commissioner of Income Tax &

ITA - 367 / 2004HC Delhi19 Nov 2010
Section 133(6)Section 271

…shed inaccurate particulars of such income. This court referred to another decision of this court in Union of India vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369 as also, the decision in Union of India vs. 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.” 2010:DHC:5593-DB ITA No.367/2004 & 296/2006 Page 37 of 42 33. In the case of Commission…

M/s. De vs. ons Pvt. Ltd

ITA/367/2004HC Delhi19 Nov 2010
Section 133(6)Section 271

…shed inaccurate particulars of such income. This court referred to another decision of this court in Union of India vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369 as also, the decision in Union of India vs. 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.” 2010:DHC:5593-DB ITA No.367/2004 & 296/2006 Page 37 of 42 33. In the case of Commission…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Krishna Maruti Ltd

Accordingly, the same is dismissed in limine

ITA - 1067 / 2010HC Delhi10 Aug 2010

Bench: The Cit(A) Who, By Virtue Of Its Order Dated 20.02.2008, Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee. Eventually The Matter Travelled To The Tribunal Which, Vide Its Order Dated 26.06.2009, Relying On The Order Of The Cit(A), Dismissed The Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Before It.

Section 11ASection 260A(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 272(1)(c)Section 276CSection 80

…that in the said case the Bench was also addressing penalty imposable under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the Central Excise Rules, 1944. ![](_page_3_Picture_1.jpeg) - 7. In Union of India v. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills, (2009) - 13 SCC 448, their Lordships decision in the context of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, thus: - "32. After referring to a number of decisions on interpretation and construction of statutory provisions, in ELT paragraphs 26 and 27 of the decision, the court observed and held as follows: - "19. In Union Budget of 1996-97, Section TIAC of the Act w…