ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, DELHI, DELHI vs. DEEPA TALWAR, DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanacit, Vs. Deepa Talwar, Central Circle-19, 6/14, Shanti Niketan, Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaupt4464F

271(1)(c)(iii) only require prior approval of the IAC for direction for payment of penalty and not for the initiation of proceedings. 3.5 The assessee has to positively prove that there is a case of non- application of mind in light of the submission that the approval u/s 153D is an administrative approval. Here, it would

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, DELHI, DELHI vs. YASMIN KAPOOR, DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanacit, Vs. Deepa Talwar, Central Circle-19, 6/14, Shanti Niketan, Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaupt4464F

271(1)(c)(iii) only require prior approval of the IAC for direction for payment of penalty and not for the initiation of proceedings. 3.5 The assessee has to positively prove that there is a case of non- application of mind in light of the submission that the approval u/s 153D is an administrative approval. Here, it would

YASMIN KAPOOR,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 19, DELHI, DELHI

271(1)(c) was only a procedural\nerror and it was not fatal to the order of penalty under section\n271(1)(c). The Hon'ble High Court held that in the said case, the\nproceedings were validly initiated and the proceedings under section\n271(1)(c)(iii) only require prior approval of the IAC for direction for\npayment

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, DELHI, DELHI vs. YASMIN KAPOOR, DELHI

Accordingly, the respective grounds raised by the respective\nassessees are hereby allowed

271(1)(c) was only a procedural\nerror and it was not fatal to the order of penalty under section\n271(1)(c). The Hon'ble High Court held that in the said case, the\nproceedings were validly initiated and the proceedings under section\n271(1)(c)(iii) only require prior approval of the IAC for direction for\npayment

SHIVALIK EDUCATIONAL & PLACEMENT SERVICES PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 has also been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee. 10. Subject to the discussion in forgone paras, total income of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2015-16 is computed as under:- Returned income Rs.41,80,240/- Add: Rs. 4,96,00,000/- Disallowance

CIT vs. DABON INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1) (c) are initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.? . . . 3. The CIT (Appeals) deleted the said addition after calling for remand report and after examining the full details furnished by the assessee. The CIT (Appeals) noticed that the assessee is in the business of manufacturing and marketing cheese as well as other dairy products

DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to obtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was only a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty. (vi) Since the entire documents were already available to the Additional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for exchange of the said documents prior

VANSHIKA MOTORS (P) LTD.,MEERUT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, MEERUT

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to obtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was only a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty. (vi) Since the entire documents were already available to the Additional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for exchange of the said documents prior

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S KHEMKA STUART LEISURE LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to obtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was only a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty. (vi) Since the entire documents were already available to the Additional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for exchange of the said documents prior

DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to\nobtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was\nonly a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty.\n(vi)\nSince the entire documents were already available to the\nAdditional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for\nexchange of the said documents

DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to\nobtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was\nonly a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty.\nSince the entire documents were already available to the\nAdditional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for\nexchange of the said documents prior

DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to\nobtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was\nonly a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty.\n(vi)\nSince the entire documents were already available to the\nAdditional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for\nexchange of the said documents

DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to\nobtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was\nonly a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty.\n\n(vi)\nSince the entire documents were already available to the\nAdditional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for\nexchange of the said

DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

271 (1) (c) of the Act, the failure to\nobtain prior permission from the IAC for imposing penalty was\nonly a procedural error and not fatal to the order of penalty.\nSince the entire documents were already available to the\nAdditional CIT in the file sent for approval, there was no need for\nexchange of the said documents prior