← All Phrases

“Section 220(6)”

Section References (mined)Section 220Section 220(6)14 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 220(6) is Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT (367 ITR 217), cited in 17 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 220(6)

Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT
367 ITR 217 · 2014 · High Court
17
citing judgments

When an assessee provides documents like share application forms, bank accounts of applicants, income tax returns of allottees, balance sheets, and PAN cards, the identity and genuineness of share application money transactions are considered established. Subsequent transmission of funds through banking channels further solidifies the genuineness.

Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi v. CIT
220 CTR 138 · 2008 · High Court
10
citing judgments

A retracted statement under Section 132(4) cannot be the sole basis for making additions to income without corroborative evidence, especially when the assessee provides a more convincing explanation.

Judgments citing Section 220(6)

Susi Charitable Trust, Khurda vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad

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

ITA 582/CTK/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Dec 2025AY 2026-27

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, “एस.एम.सी” "यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK "ी जाज

Jayant Security and Finance Ltd, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 91/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 156Section 220(6)Section 221(1)Section 246ASection 253

assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR however stated that no application is filed within the meaning of Section 220(6) of the Act. It was also stated that in pursuance to the notice of demand u/s 156 no request ... Range head or to the Office of PCIT for the stay of demand was ever made. Further the Section 220(6) of the Act uses the word “may” and not “shall”. Minuscule penalty is imposed against the huge outstanding dues. Ld. DR further contended that till date no submission

Jayant Security and Finance Ltd, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 90/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 156Section 220(6)Section 221(1)Section 246ASection 253

assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR however stated that no application is filed within the meaning of Section 220(6) of the Act. It was also stated that in pursuance to the notice of demand u/s 156 no request ... Range head or to the Office of PCIT for the stay of demand was ever made. Further the Section 220(6) of the Act uses the word “may” and not “shall”. Minuscule penalty is imposed against the huge outstanding dues. Ld. DR further contended that till date no submission

Jayant Security and Finance Ltd, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 89/IND/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 156Section 220(6)Section 221(1)Section 246ASection 253

assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR however stated that no application is filed within the meaning of Section 220(6) of the Act. It was also stated that in pursuance to the notice of demand u/s 156 no request ... Range head or to the Office of PCIT for the stay of demand was ever made. Further the Section 220(6) of the Act uses the word “may” and not “shall”. Minuscule penalty is imposed against the huge outstanding dues. Ld. DR further contended that till date no submission

Jayant Security and Finance Ltd, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

ITA 88/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 156Section 220(6)Section 221(1)Section 246ASection 253

assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR however stated that no application is filed within the meaning of Section 220(6) of the Act. It was also stated that in pursuance to the notice of demand u/s 156 no request ... Range head or to the Office of PCIT for the stay of demand was ever made. Further the Section 220(6) of the Act uses the word “may” and not “shall”. Minuscule penalty is imposed against the huge outstanding dues. Ld. DR further contended that till date no submission

Jayant Security and Finance Ltd, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

ITA 86/IND/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 156Section 220Section 220(6)Section 221(1)Section 246ASection 253

assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR however stated that no application is filed within the meaning of Section 220(6) of the Act. It was also stated that in pursuance to the notice of demand u/s 156 no request

Jamuna Devi Naresh Chandra Mahavidyalaya, Jalaun vs. ITO-TDS, Kanpur

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

ITA 464/LKW/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, DR
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

correction would have been done. However, it was only when he discovered that the earlier demand had been reiterated and interest under section 220(6) been levied that the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) was filed. We observe from the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A) that

Tethibari Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited, East Midnapore vs. I.T.O., Ward - 27(1), Haldia, East Midnapore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2251/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 44ASection 69Section 69ASection 80P

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “सी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार

Shweta Infrastructure & Housing (I) Pvt. Ltd., Nashik vs. DCIT, Circle 13(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3851/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shweta Infrastructure & Housing Dy. Cit, Circle 13(2)(2), (I) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Samraat Head Quarters, A33, 7Th Marine Lines, Lane, Satpur Midc Road, Nice Mumbai-400020. Area, Nashik-422007. Pan No. Aajcs 4306 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2024

For Appellant: None
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 220(6)Section 246A

respect of objections raised on reasons recorded for reopening of respect of objections raised on reasons recorded for reopening of assessment proceedings. Section 220(6) Stay of demand on the essment proceedings. Section 220(6) Stay of demand on the essment proceedings. Section 220(6) Stay of demand

M/S. Regional Oilseeds Growers Co-Operative Societies Union Limited, Chitradurga vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Davangere

ITA 1355/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 120(4)(b)Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

juris- diction in the matter was not over merely on the passing of the assessment order but it continued in terms of section 220(6) of the Act in dealing with the petition for stay. What has happened in the present case is that after having passed the assessment order ... seems to have washed his hands of the matter and left it to the Deputy Commissioner to decide the stay petition filed under section 220(6) of the Act. We are of the opinion that this was not permissible in law. The ratio of the above decision squarely applies

Aerens Jai Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9, New Delhi

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

ITA 6677/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Garg

For Appellant: Shri I.P. BansalFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 133A(3)(ia)Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.M

Aerens Jai Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9, New Delhi

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

ITA 6676/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Garg

For Appellant: Shri I.P. BansalFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 133A(3)(ia)Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.M

Aerens Jai Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9, New Delhi

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

ITA 6675/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Garg

For Appellant: Shri I.P. BansalFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 133A(3)(ia)Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.M

Commssioner of Income Tax Delhi-Xvi vs. S.S. Ahluwalia

ITA - 255 / 2002HC Delhi14 Mar 2014
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

Delhi) relates to a different factual 2014:DHC:1423-DB ITA 255/2002 + connected Page 38 of 61 matrix. An application under Section 220(6) of the Act was filed but the assessee was advised by Additional Commissioner to approach Deputy Commissioner, who had concurrent jurisdiction. Assessee complied and moved ... applications and a direction was passed to deposit 15% of the tax liability. Dispute arose whether the application under Section 220(6) should have been decided by Additional Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner. Reference was made to the term ―Assessing Officer‖ as defined in Section