DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S LAKHANI RUBBER UDYOG P. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vs. Lakhani Rubber Udyog P. Circle-1, Block-B, Ltd, New Cgo Complex, Plot No. 131, Sector-24, Faridabad Faridabad (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty levied under section 271 (1) (C) on 3 disallowances i.e. (i) disallowance under section 14 A of Rs. 5 3, 46, 460/– , (ii) disallowance

M/S. CHINTELS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2008-09 Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Year: 2010-11

penalty proceedings are independent proceedings, and as such, mere disallowance or addition could not lead to the levy of penalty

M/S. CHINTELS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2008-09 Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Year: 2010-11

penalty proceedings are independent proceedings, and as such, mere disallowance or addition could not lead to the levy of penalty

M/S. CHINTELS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2008-09 Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Year: 2010-11

penalty proceedings are independent proceedings, and as such, mere disallowance or addition could not lead to the levy of penalty

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PODDAR PIGMENTS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. M/S. Poddar Pigments Ltd., A- Dcit, Circle-14(1), New Delhi 283, Ground Floor, Okhla Indl. Area-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaacp1125E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. P.C. Parwal, Fca Date Of Hearing 08.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 05.10.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/01/2014 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) For Assessment Year 2007-08, Wherein He Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 29/03/2012 Levying Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: I. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Penalty Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On Account Of Additions Under The Head Of U/S 40(A)(I) Amounting To Rs.9,14,191/- & Ltcg Amounting To Rs.41,62,154/- Holding That The Assessee Has Not Furnished Any Inaccurate Particulars Or Has Made Any Deliberate Attempt To Conceal Income. Ii. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Above

penalty levied u/s 271(l)(c) on the above disallowance be deleted. B. Penalty in respect of disallowance of depreciation

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

A2Z MAINTENANCE & ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

INFRA ENGINEERS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CC-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. CCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD vs. A2Z INFRA ENGINEERS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD vs. A2Z MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

disallowance was upheld by CIT(A). Thereafter, A0 imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on this disallowance

SHARSH FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia.Y. : 2005-06 M/S Sharsh Finance & Acit, Circle 18(1), Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. New Delhi 16L, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 (Pan: Aahcs1410L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of Rs. 3,66,654/- u/s 14A (Pg. 2 of the penalty order). Penalty was confirmed by the Ld. C!T(A) except

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SRF LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 1995-96 Vs. M/S. Srf Ltd., Block-C, Sector - Acit, Circle-9(1), Room No. 163, C.R. Building, New Delhi 45, Gurgaon Pan : Aaacs0206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Satyen Sethi, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 18.11.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 06/03/2012 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xii, New Delhi For Assessment Year 1995-96, In Respect Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”), Levied By The Assessing Officer. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: 1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Deleting The Penalty Of Rs.3,43,70,911/- Imposed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act. 2. The Appellant Craves To Amend Modify, Alter, Add Or Forego Any Ground Of Appeal At Any Tiem Before Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.

penalty is clearly disclosed in the Return of the assessee, therefore, mere disallowing the expenses, penalty cannot be imposed. Therefore

HINDUSTAN FERTILISER CORPORATION LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCOT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R Kumar

disallowance cannot be made in the penalty proceedings. Accordingly, the penalty levied on the enhanced disallowance is deleted. 6. In so far as levy

M/S. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

penalty has been rightly imposed. After examining all the submission in respect of various grounds of disallowance on which penalty

M/S. OIL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

disallowance. 8. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding penalty u/s 27(l)(c) for disallowance u/s 14A of Rs. 40,69,000.00 when