GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

271(1)(c) whereas the notice\nhas been issued u/s 271AAB. In nutshell, Ld. AR argued that the AO has\nspecified a wrong charge in the notice issued to assessee and thereby\ncommitted a grave illegality in initiating penalty-proceeding. Therefore, Ld. AR\ncontended, the penalty proceeding initiated by AO is liable to be stuck down.\nTo support his contention

SRK DEV BUILD PVT LTD.,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT 5(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2016-17 Srk Dev Build Pvt. Ltd, Dcit/Acit-5(1) 18/2, Lasudia Mori, Indore बनाम/ A.B. Road, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaqcs3387P Assessee By Shri Pranay Goyal & S.N. Goyal, Cas Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.06.2024

penalty- order the AO has himself stated “whereas the assessee is not carrying any business except letting out the properties”. Thus, there is no doubt or dispute regarding engagement of assessee in the business of letting of properties. (ii) The case of assessee for immediate preceding AY 2015-16 was also subjected to scrutiny assessment wherein questionnaire u/s 142(1

DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S KALYAN TOLL HIGHWAY PVT.LTD, INDORE

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Dcit(Central)-2 M/S. Kalyan Toll Highway Pvt. Ltd. Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Revenue ) Vs. P.A. No. Aadck9401F Appellant By Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 21.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M:

penalty proceedings following show cause notice was issued u/s 274 r.w.rt. 271(1)(c) of the Act : M/s. Kalyan toll Highways Pvt. Ltd. ITANo.85/Ind/2020 OFFICER OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2, INDORE PAN:AADCK9401E TO, M/s. Kalyan Toll Highways Pvt. Ltd., 15/3, Vidhyadeep, Manoramaganj Indore Sir, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271(1

PRAKASH ASPHALTINGS AND TOLL HIGHWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED,MHOW vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, INDORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15 Prakash Asphalting & Toll Acit Central Circle -1 Highways (India) Limited, Indore बनाम/ 76, Mall Road, Vs. Mhow (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aabcp0398N Assessee By Shri Anup Garg & Vikas Guru, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2025

142(1) of the Act issued, the assessee admitted the undisclosed income of Rs. 5,75,000/-. Accordingly addition of Rs. 5,75,000/- was made to the total income for the AY 2014-15. And penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB for the AY 2014-15 was initiated by the Ld. AO on this issue. 2.4 From the seized document

RIYAZ QURESHI ,JHABUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHABUA

Appeals are allowed

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c), the same is\nscanned and re-produced here:\nRiyaz Qureshi\nITA Nos.663 to 665/Ind/2024\nA.Ys.2013-14 to 2015-16\nNOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME\nTAX ACT, 1961\nPAN NO. AADPQ0375P\nTo,\nShri Riyaz Qureshi\n12. MOLANA AZAD MARG, JHABUA\nOffice of the\nIncome Tax Officer

RIYAZ QURESHI ,JHABUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX

Appeals are allowed

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c), the same is\nscanned and re-produced here:\nRiyaz Qureshi\nITA Nos.663 to 665/Ind/2024\nA.Ys.2013-14 to 2015-16\nNOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME\nTAX ACT, 1961\nPAN NO. AADPQ0375P\nTo,\nShri Riyaz Qureshi\n12. MOLANA AZAD MARG, JHABUA\nOffice of the\nIncome Tax Officer

SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL,BURHANUPUR vs. JOINT COMMISIIONER OF INCOME TAX -OSD, CENTRAL-1, INDORE , INDORE

142(1)/143(2) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, No.\ndated\n* have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such\nincome,\nYou are hereby requested to appear before me at 11:00 AM on 25/01/2018 and show\ncause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 271(1

RIYAZ QURESHI ,JHABUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHABUA

Appeals are allowed

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c), the same is\nscanned and re-produced here:\nPage 2 of 14\nRiyaz Qureshi\nITA Nos. 663 to 665/Ind/2024\nA.Ys. 2013-14 to 2015-16\nNOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME\nTAX ACT, 1961\nPAN NO. AADPQ0375P\nTo,\nShri Riyaz Qureshi\n12. MOLANA AZAD MARG, JHABUA\nOffice

SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL ,BURHANPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -OSD, CENTRAL-1, INDORE , INDORE

142(1)/143(2) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, No.\ndated\nhave concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such\nincome,\nYou are hereby requested to appear before me at 11:00 AM on 25/01/2018 and show\ncause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 271(1

SWAN PETRCHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Swan Petrochemicals Dcit (Central), Pvt.Ltd, Indore Unit No.308 Acme Plaza, Opp. Sangam Cinema, Vs. Andheri Kurlka, Maharashtra (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcr9592C Assessee By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan & Ms. Ruchira Singhal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 271(1)(c) whereas at the most it is a case of furnishing incorrect particulars of income and not concealment of particulars of income. Therefore the Explanation-1 is not applicable in the case of the assessee. In support of his contention he has relied upon the following decisions: 4 M/s. Swan Petrochemicals Pvt.Ltd (i) Hon’ble Supreme Court

RAJYESHWAR RETAIL TRADE SYSTEMS PVT LTD,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

271(1)(b) of\nthe Act. A show cause notice for penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) of the\nAct dated 29.12.2020 was issued to the assessee requiring him\nto show cause on or before 04.01.2021 as to why penalty of\nRs.10,000/- should not be levied upon the assessee for non-\ncompliance of notice u/s 142(1

SMT. KAVITA SACHDEV,INDORE vs. ITO-3(4), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Kavita Sachdev, Income-Tax Officer, 112,Jairampur Colony, 3(4), बनाम/ Indore. Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan : Arcps6793D Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.05.2024

Section 271(1)(c) and, hence, when the AO has determined the total tax on the income assessed at Rs. 2,08,142/- whereas the self-assessment tax paid by the assessee before the notice u/s 148 was issued is Rs.2,16,470/-, then balance would be nil and ,consequently, there would be nil amount of tax sought

R.M CHEMICALS P LTD ,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/AIT 4 (1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S.R.M. Chemicals Acit , 4(1), Pvt.Ltd., Bhopal बनाम/ 74,Jumerati, Bhopal Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaacr7154D Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Ca & Shri Yash Kukreja, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.07.2023

section 271(1)(c) of the act, when the assessee clearly understood the purport and import of the notice issued u/s 271(1)(c). Ld. DR submitted that the SLP filed by assessee against the said decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court has also been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. (ii) Secondly on merit, Ld. DR submitted that

JAYGANGA EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2 , BHOPAL

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI PARESH M JOSHI (Judicial Member)

section 148 of the 'Act' and levied penalty of amount Rs 10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for the A.Y.2015-16.\n\n4. 1. 2. On perusal of assessment records, I find that during the assessment proceedings, the appellant always failed to comply the notices issued to him. As per record, several opportunities have been given

VIJAYA DARAK,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed

u/s 142(1) dated 19.02.2021. Ld. AR/assessee is harping on the provision of section 273B, therefore at first we re-produce the same:\n\n“273B. Notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 271, ………………, clause (d) of sub- section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, no penalty

RAJYESHWAR RETAIL TRADE SYSTEMS PVT LTD,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result- Impugned order is set aside and Penalty of

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2015-16

Penalty Order”. Page 8 was downloaded from portal. Basis PB filed the Ld. AR contended that show cause notice u/s 271(1)(b) dated 08.02.2021 was not received by the assessee. Further, notice u/s 142(1) cannot be issued as intent and purpose of section

VIJAYA DARAK,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed

u/s 142(1) dated 19.02.2021. Ld.\nAR/assessee is harping on the provision of section 273B, therefore at first we re-produce the same:\n“273B. Notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 271, ………………, clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, no penalty

M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,INDORE vs. JCIT TDS, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

1)(a). 5. Without prejudice, the penalty levied by the Ld. JCIT for F.Y. 2006- 07 is bad in law as no penalty was initiated in the original assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. Page 2 of 12 ITA No.407 to 410/Ind/2018 Bharti Airtel Ltd.. Page 3 of 12 2. The assessee is a telecom service provider engaged