What is Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Section 271 of the Income-tax Act, being a penal provision, must be construed strictly and narrowly. The case also initially held that a clarificatory amendment was not retrospectively applicable, a view later reversed by a larger bench.

How many judgments cite Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT?

91 judgments on BharatTax cite Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT (289 ITR 83), spanning 2007 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115BBE, Section 132, Section 132A, Section 133A, Section 135A, Section 139.

Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT (289 ITR 83)

Mr. Nikhil Sawhney, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1249/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur hansra, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

…d to include losses. The expression 'profits and gains' refers to positive income whereas losses represent negative profit or in other words minus income. This aspect does not appear to have been noticed by the Bench in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd.'s case [2007] 289 ITR 83 (SC); [2007] 9 SCC 665. Reference to the order by this court dismissing the Revenue's Civil Appeal No. 7961 of 1996 in CIT v. Prithipal Singh and Co. [2001] 249 ITR 670 (SC) is also not very important because that was in relation to the assessment year 1970-71 when Explanation 4 to section 271(l)(c) was not in existence. The view of this court in…

Albert Joseph Rozario, Mumbai vs. ITO, Int. Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1168/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2018-19 Albert Joseph Rozario, Ito, (Int. Tax), Circle-4(1)(1), B-311, 5Th Wing, Room No. 629, 6Th Floor, Inlaks Park, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Yari Road, Versova, C-41 To C-43, G Block, Andheri West, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400058 Bandra East, Pan : Afvpr6139P Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Dharan Gandhi For Revenue : Shri Sridhar G. Menon, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22-07-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 R/W 144C(13) Of The Act Dt. 30-12-2024, Consequent To The Directions Given By The Ld. Drp-1, Mumbai-3, U/S 144C(5) Of The Act, Dated 30-11-2024 Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay.) 2018-19. 2. Briefly The Facts Of The Case Are That Basis Information Available Through The Insight Portal That The Assessee Had Purchased Immoveable Properties Amounting To Rs. 8,31,45,549/- & Has Received Interest

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar G. Menon, Sr.DR

Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 56(2)(x)Section 69

…y and applicable even retrospectively. The said judgment has been rendered by a larger Division 10 Bench comprising of 3 Judges of the Supreme Court and it has reversed the earlier judgement of another Division Bench in the case of Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. (159 Taxmann 155) in which Revenue's arguments placing reliance on Notes to Clauses relating to the amendment (supra) to submit that the amendment was clarificatory in nature and consequentially it was applicable retrospectively, was not accepted. While reversing the decision in the case of Virtual Soft Systems Ltd., the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. G…

Ajoy Sharma, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Jaipur

ITA 545/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80C

…se a penalty u/s 271(1)(c), it must be proved that the assessee has consciously made the concealment or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. The said principle has been reiterated in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. vs. CIT (2007) 207 CTR (SC) 733: (2007) 289 ITR 83 (SC) held that: “24. Sec.271 of the Act is a penal provision and there are well established principles for the interpretation of such a penal provision. Such a provision has to be construed strictly and narrowly and not widely or with the object of advancing the object and intention of the legislature.” 8.3 The present case is also supported by de…

Ajoy Sharma, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Jaipur

ITA 544/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80C

…se a penalty u/s 271(1)(c), it must be proved that the assessee has consciously made the concealment or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. The said principle has been reiterated in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. vs. CIT (2007) 207 CTR (SC) 733: (2007) 289 ITR 83 (SC) held that: “24. Sec.271 of the Act is a penal provision and there are well established principles for the interpretation of such a penal provision. Such a provision has to be construed strictly and narrowly and not widely or with the object of advancing the object and intention of the legislature.” 8.3 The present case is also supported by de…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (IT and TP) vs. M/s. Idea Cellular Limited

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

ITTA/14/2021HC Telangana19 Oct 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 107

…v. Bank of Bihar, AIR 1967 SC 389. Merely describing a provision as an “Explanation” or a “clarification” is not decisive of its true meaning and import. On this aspect, this Court in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, (2007) 289 ITR 83 (SC) observed as under : “Even if the statute does contain a statement to the effect that the amendment is declaratory or clarificatory, that is not the end of the matter. The Court will not regard itself as being bound by the said statement in the statute itself, but will proceed to analyse the nature of the amendment and then conc…

ACIT Cir-1, Dhanbad vs. M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd, Dhanbad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 298/RAN/2017[08-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 31(1)Section 32(1)Section 32(2)

…ective effect of amendment. The Bombay High Court held that the amendment of 2002 was only clarificatory and applied to all pending proceedings on or after amendment. This case was further elaborated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in “Virtual Soft System Ltd vs CIT 289 ITR 83”. In which it was held there was nothing in the statute to suggest that 2022 amendment was declaratory and applied to all pending cases. It was purely a case of amendment to the statute. There is no assumption as to its retrospectivity. Retrospectivity has to be enacted specifically in the fiscal statute and more so in the case of panel provisions…

M/S Bharat Cooking Coal Limited, Dhanbad vs. ACIT Circle-1, Dhanbad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/RAN/2017[08-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 31(1)Section 32(1)Section 32(2)

…ective effect of amendment. The Bombay High Court held that the amendment of 2002 was only clarificatory and applied to all pending proceedings on or after amendment. This case was further elaborated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in “Virtual Soft System Ltd vs CIT 289 ITR 83”. In which it was held there was nothing in the statute to suggest that 2022 amendment was declaratory and applied to all pending cases. It was purely a case of amendment to the statute. There is no assumption as to its retrospectivity. Retrospectivity has to be enacted specifically in the fiscal statute and more so in the case of panel provisions…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. Industrial Promotion and Investment Corporation of Orissa Ltd

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

ITA/15/2021HC Orissa31 Jan 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 107

…v. Bank of Bihar, AIR 1967 SC 389. Merely describing a provision as an “Explanation” or a “clarification” is not decisive of its true meaning and import. On this aspect, this Court in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, (2007) 289 ITR 83 (SC) observed as under : “Even if the statute does contain a statement to the effect that the amendment is declaratory or clarificatory, that is not the end of the matter. The Court will not regard itself as being bound by the said statement in the statute itself, but will proceed to analyse the nature of the amendment and then conc…

Shri Suresh Mal Lodha, 537-38, Mahima Trinity, New Sanganer Road, Swej Farm, Jaipur vs. ACIT Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 968/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahenda Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…a penalty u/s 271(1)(c), it has to be proved that the assessee has consciously made the concealment or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. The said principle has been reiterated in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. vs. CIT (2007) 207 CTR (SC) 733: (2007) 289 ITR 83 (SC) held that “24. Sec.271 of the Act is a penal provision and there are well established principles for the interpretation of such a penal provision. Such a provision has to be construed SURESH MAL LODHA VS ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR strictly and narrowly and not widely or with the object of advancing the object and intention of the legislature.” 1…

Sri Rajanikanth Reddy, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 774/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Miss. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the m…