RAOOF R DHANANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for Rs. 12,360/- with respect to the additions made on account of unexplained cash credit

RAOOF R DHANANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for Rs. 12,360/- with respect to the additions made on account of unexplained cash credit

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee held ownership in several properties in respect of which no income was declared I.T.A Nos. 1029, 1030, 1031,1032, 2771 & 2772 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2003-04 to 2004-05 Page No. 5 Shri Pavan M. Sharma vs. ITO in the return of income

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee held ownership in several properties in respect of which no income was declared I.T.A Nos. 1029, 1030, 1031,1032, 2771 & 2772 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2003-04 to 2004-05 Page No. 5 Shri Pavan M. Sharma vs. ITO in the return of income

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee held ownership in several properties in respect of which no income was declared I.T.A Nos. 1029, 1030, 1031,1032, 2771 & 2772 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2003-04 to 2004-05 Page No. 5 Shri Pavan M. Sharma vs. ITO in the return of income

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee held ownership in several properties in respect of which no income was declared I.T.A Nos. 1029, 1030, 1031,1032, 2771 & 2772 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2003-04 to 2004-05 Page No. 5 Shri Pavan M. Sharma vs. ITO in the return of income

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee held ownership in several properties in respect of which no income was declared I.T.A Nos. 1029, 1030, 1031,1032, 2771 & 2772 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2003-04 to 2004-05 Page No. 5 Shri Pavan M. Sharma vs. ITO in the return of income

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee held ownership in several properties in respect of which no income was declared I.T.A Nos. 1029, 1030, 1031,1032, 2771 & 2772 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2003-04 to 2004-05 Page No. 5 Shri Pavan M. Sharma vs. ITO in the return of income

M/S.S.K. FINVEST LTD.,,NADIAD vs. THE ACIT.,KHEDA CIRCLE,, NADIAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2721 /Ahd/2013 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3103 /Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 1996-1997 S.K. Finvest Ltd., The D.C.I.T, C-14, Trimurti Complex, Vs. Circle, Nadiad. Station Road, Nadiad.

u/s 271(1)© when the explanation furnished by the appellant was not found to be false and since penalty proceedings are quite independent of assessment proceedings, the penalty ought not to have been levied based on mere addition. It be so held now and penalty levied by AO and confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) be cancelled

S.K. FINVEST LTD.,,NADIAD vs. THE DY.CIT., NADIAD CIRCLE,, NADIAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2721 /Ahd/2013 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3103 /Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 1996-1997 S.K. Finvest Ltd., The D.C.I.T, C-14, Trimurti Complex, Vs. Circle, Nadiad. Station Road, Nadiad.

u/s 271(1)© when the explanation furnished by the appellant was not found to be false and since penalty proceedings are quite independent of assessment proceedings, the penalty ought not to have been levied based on mere addition. It be so held now and penalty levied by AO and confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) be cancelled

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

unexplained income or there was no recovery of cash or amount from assessee, levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act would be set aside. 9.5.7 In the case of CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals 11 taxmann.com 207 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court held that for imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c), concealment of particulars of income

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

unexplained income or there was no recovery of cash or amount from assessee, levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act would be set aside. 9.5.7 In the case of CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals 11 taxmann.com 207 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court held that for imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c), concealment of particulars of income

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

unexplained income or there was no recovery of cash or amount from assessee, levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act would be set aside. 9.5.7 In the case of CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals 11 taxmann.com 207 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court held that for imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c), concealment of particulars of income

MAYUR NIRMALKUMAR JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

unexplained cash credits to the assessee’s income. Penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars and concealing income. In addition to the above, the assessee had shown unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 21,38,214/- in the balance sheet. Notices under Section 133(6) were issued to the depositors

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

cash credits received are deemed to be unexplained for want of necessary evidences and consequently addition is made u/s.68. He further submitted that when addition is made by invoking legal fiction it is not necessary that penalty u/s. 271

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

cash credits received are deemed to be unexplained for want of necessary evidences and consequently addition is made u/s.68. He further submitted that when addition is made by invoking legal fiction it is not necessary that penalty u/s. 271

SHILPABEN R. LUHANA,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash credits had no nexus with any documents found or incriminating statement made during the course of search and such discovery of cash credits discovered during the course of assessment proceedings on the assessee, was independent of any statement or incriminating material found during the course of search carried out on Dhanjimama group. It would be useful at this

THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1) (c) is not justified.” 3. Additional ground: “Appellant craves leave to raise this additional ground of appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a legal ground and therefore as per the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power (229 ITR 383) it can be raised before