“concealment of income”

Cifco Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD II), Cr 7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

M/A. Cifco Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ACIT (OSD II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

M/S. Cifco Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD-II) Cr.-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

M/S. Cifco Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

M/S. Cifco Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

M/S. Cifco Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

M/S. Cifco Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

The ACIT (OSD-II) Cen RG-7, Mumbai vs. M/S. Cifco Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

ACIT (OSD-II) Cent. RG. - 7, Mumbai vs. M/S. Cifco Finance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

dismissed, therefore, the learned AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (C) of the act by order dated 30/3/2009 leaving penalty for concealment of income. 79. While deciding the appeal of the assessee, against the order of the learned CIT – A in quantum proceedings, we have deleted all the additions confirmed

Lotus Labs P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Banglore (Present Incharge Mumbai)

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Since the above disallowance, attracts penal provisions, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the income-tax: Act, 1961 is initiated separately for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 5. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) but without any success. Learned

ACIT Circle-16(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Asianet News Networks Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

with effect from 1-4-2001. 2. Under clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Act, penalty for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is determined based on the "amount of tax sought to be evaded" which has been defined inter-alia

Prashant Madhusudan Mahagaokar, Thane vs. DCIT CC 2, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the Appellant for Assessment Year

hence disallowed. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, are initiated separately for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of income of Rs. 38,52,021/-“ 17. Learned Authorised Representative for the Appellant submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings the Appellant was asked

ACIT Circle-16 (1), Mumbai vs. M/S Asianet News Network Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

same be annulled, since penalty is levied in pursuance of vague notice i.e without specifying whether it is inaccurate particular or concealment of income hence bad in iaw. 2. The learned AO erred in levying the penalty U/s 271(1)(C) of the act without specifying the exact limb ... with effect from 1-4-2001. 2. Under clause (Hi) of sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Act, penalty for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is determined based on the "amount of tax sought to be evaded" which has been defined inter-alia

Mrs Chhaya Himmat Jagda, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-32(1)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 968/Mum/2022 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ito Ward 32(1)(2) Mrs. Chhaya Himmat C-11, Pratyakshkar Jagda 602-Manas Moti Bhavan, Bandra Kurla बनाम/ Building No. 1 (6Th Floor), Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai-400 051 Devidas Lane, Near Vs. Lawrence School, Borivali (West), Mumbai-400 092 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaepj7836R (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri M. Subramanian, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Praveen Shekhar, Ld. Dr सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 04.08.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 24.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 21.04.2022, Passed By National Faceless

basis of certain information received from Kolkata investigation directorate. The penalty has been levied by the AO holding it to be concealment of income as well as furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 4. Ld. CIT(A) has too confirmed the penalty. 5. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted

Superflo Filter Private Limited, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessement Centre, Delhi

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1588 & 1589/Mum/2022 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12) National Faceless Superflo Filters Pvt. Assessment Centre, Ltd. Delhi B-5/103-104 Greenland बनाम/ Co-Op. Society, Vs. Shrinivas Bagarka Road, J. B. Nagar Andheri (East), Mumbai-400 059 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aadcs4955N (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri U. Singh, Ld. Dr सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 23.08.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Impugned Order Of Even Date 31.05.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Relation To Penalty Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) For Ay 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2

under section 271(1)(c) was also imposed on the assessee for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and for concealment of income. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). In the meantime, the quantum additions travelled in appeal before a coordinate bench of this Tribunal ... channels. Merely because the suppliers could not be traced at the given address would not automatically lead to a conclusion that there was concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee. The assessee made a claim which 7 I.T.A. No. 1588 & 1589/Mum/2022 Superflo Filters

Dlh Kamla Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC- 3(4), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1373 & 1374/Mum/2019 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Dcit Cen. Cir. -3(4), Dlh Kamla Developers 19Th Floor, Air India Ground Floor, Shanti बनाम/ Vimal, P. M. Road, Vile Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Parle East, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 057 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aahfd0790K (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri T. Shankar, Ld. Dr सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 22.08.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 22.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Impugned Order Of Even Date 24.12.2018, Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-51, Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3)/153A For Ay 2013-14 & Section 143(3) For Ay 2014-15. 2

hereby initiated for 9 I.T.A. No. 1373 & 1374/Mum/2019 DLH Kamla Developers furnishing inaccurate particulars of income thereby leading to concealment of income. 10. Further it is stated that the assessee must have incurred some commission expense on the said accommodation entries w.r.t. unsecured loan taken which has not been accounted ... income of the assessee. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated/for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income leading to concealment of income. 10 I.T.A. No. 1373 & 1374/Mum/2019 DLH Kamla Developers 9. Ld. CIT(A) has noted in para no. 4 of the appellate order that various opportunities were

Nitin Parkash, Thane vs. DCIT Cir 3, Thane

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 817/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं. 1540/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) Mr. Nitin Parkash , 221/222, Swasstik Plaza, Pokhran Road No.2, Subhash Nagar, Thane (W) – 400 601 Pan: Aaspp-1411-G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 3, Thane. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Akash Kumar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Tharian Oommen& Shri B.K.Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 22/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.817/Mum/2015 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane [In Short ‘The Cit(A)] Dated 01/01/2015 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. This Appeal Is In The Second Round Before The Tribunal. Earlier This Appeal Of The Assessee Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 19/03/2018. Thereafter, The Assessee Filed Miscellaneous Application, Vide Ma No.271/Mum/2018 Seeking

Officer has time and again mentioned both the limbs/charge of section 271(1)(c) of the Act i.e. “inaccurate particulars of income” and “concealment of income”. This expression have been used in the penalty order repeatedly in varied forms. Thus, there was ambiguity in the mind of Assessing Officer about ... Apex Court in the case of T. Ashok Pai vs. CIT 292 ITR 11 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars carry different connotations. Hence, these expressions cannot be used inter changeably. The ambiguity in the penalty order makes it legally unsustainable. 16. In the light

Nitin Parkash, Thane vs. DCIT Cir 3, Thane

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 817/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं. 1540/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) Mr. Nitin Parkash , 221/222, Swasstik Plaza, Pokhran Road No.2, Subhash Nagar, Thane (W) – 400 601 Pan: Aaspp-1411-G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 3, Thane. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Akash Kumar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Tharian Oommen& Shri B.K.Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 22/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.817/Mum/2015 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane [In Short ‘The Cit(A)] Dated 01/01/2015 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. This Appeal Is In The Second Round Before The Tribunal. Earlier This Appeal Of The Assessee Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 19/03/2018. Thereafter, The Assessee Filed Miscellaneous Application, Vide Ma No.271/Mum/2018 Seeking

Officer has time and again mentioned both the limbs/charge of section 271(1)(c) of the Act i.e. “inaccurate particulars of income” and “concealment of income”. This expression have been used in the penalty order repeatedly in varied forms. Thus, there was ambiguity in the mind of Assessing Officer about ... Apex Court in the case of T. Ashok Pai vs. CIT 292 ITR 11 has held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars carry different connotations. Hence, these expressions cannot be used inter changeably. The ambiguity in the penalty order makes it legally unsustainable. 16. In the light

Mr. Real Team System Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15 (3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1389/Mum/2019 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ito 15(3)(1) M/S Real Team Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Systems Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ 1101, Bldg. No. 6, Road, Churchgate, Seawood Estates, Nri Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Complex, Navi Mumbai- 400 706 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aadcr0073Q (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Mahita Nayar, Ld. Dr सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 17.08.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 17.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 27.12.2018, Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Mumbai In Relation To Penalty Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) For Ay 2014-15. 2

while applying the rates of depreciation. First of all, we have to see whether there was any inadvertent mistake or there was deliberate concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Here in this case, assessee has stated that there was an error in noting, the rate of depreciation