BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

160 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi249Mumbai160Chennai104Jaipur61Kolkata44Bangalore34Ahmedabad27Visakhapatnam23Karnataka22Pune21Chandigarh18Indore18Lucknow16Hyderabad15Agra11Rajkot8Raipur8Dehradun7Nagpur6Jabalpur4Allahabad4Cochin3Cuttack3Surat3Amritsar3SC2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)87Section 271(1)(c)69Section 15460Addition to Income55Penalty47Disallowance45Section 234E40Rectification u/s 15432Depreciation24

TRADE WINGS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result , appeal of the assessee company in ITA No

ITA 3416/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3417/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3418/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3419/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Trade Wings Limited, Income Tax Officer – Ward बनाम/ 18/20-K, Dubash Marg, 2(3)(3), V. Fort,Mumbai – 400 023. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact4639F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra,DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the Act by producing evidences with respect to additions of fixed assets before ITA 3416 to 3419/Mum/2013 7 the A.O. , whereby relief was granted by the AO of Rs. 1,30,191/- vide orders u/s 154 of the Act dated 27th August, 2012 and to that extent the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 160 · Page 1 of 8

...
Section 143(2)22
Deduction22
Section 25021

TRADE WINGS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result , appeal of the assessee company in ITA No

ITA 3417/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3417/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3418/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3419/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Trade Wings Limited, Income Tax Officer – Ward बनाम/ 18/20-K, Dubash Marg, 2(3)(3), V. Fort,Mumbai – 400 023. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact4639F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra,DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the Act by producing evidences with respect to additions of fixed assets before ITA 3416 to 3419/Mum/2013 7 the A.O. , whereby relief was granted by the AO of Rs. 1,30,191/- vide orders u/s 154 of the Act dated 27th August, 2012 and to that extent the assessee

TRADE WINGS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result , appeal of the assessee company in ITA No

ITA 3419/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3417/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3418/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3419/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Trade Wings Limited, Income Tax Officer – Ward बनाम/ 18/20-K, Dubash Marg, 2(3)(3), V. Fort,Mumbai – 400 023. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact4639F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra,DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the Act by producing evidences with respect to additions of fixed assets before ITA 3416 to 3419/Mum/2013 7 the A.O. , whereby relief was granted by the AO of Rs. 1,30,191/- vide orders u/s 154 of the Act dated 27th August, 2012 and to that extent the assessee

TRADE WINGS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result , appeal of the assessee company in ITA No

ITA 3418/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3417/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3418/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3419/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Trade Wings Limited, Income Tax Officer – Ward बनाम/ 18/20-K, Dubash Marg, 2(3)(3), V. Fort,Mumbai – 400 023. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact4639F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra,DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the Act by producing evidences with respect to additions of fixed assets before ITA 3416 to 3419/Mum/2013 7 the A.O. , whereby relief was granted by the AO of Rs. 1,30,191/- vide orders u/s 154 of the Act dated 27th August, 2012 and to that extent the assessee

THE DCIT-1(3)(1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S FERN INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1402/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 139Section 143Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is attracted only if any person has concealed the particulars of his income or has furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. I have carefully considered the nature of additions made by the AO and case-laws relied upon by the appellant. In the rectification order passed u/s. 154

RAMACHANDRAN A. POTHI,MUMBAI vs. JCIT 24 (2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7268/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 7268/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) Shri Ramachandran A Pothi The Jt. Commissioner Of 513, Laxmi Plaza, Laxmi Income Tax, Circle 24(2) फनाभ/ 4 Th Industrial Estate Andheri West, Room No.504, Floor, Mumbai-400 053 Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. Mumbai-400 012 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aacpp8620K अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Rushabh Mehta, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Bharat Andhle, Sr. Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 02.08.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 08.10.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-36, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. Mumbai-36/11494/2016-17 Vide Dated 30.10.2019. The Assessment Was Framed By The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 24(2), Mumbai (In Short Jcit/ Ao) For The A.Y. Shri Ramachandran A Pothi; Ay 09-10 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 29.11.2011 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

rectification order under section 154 of the Act that due to typing error penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income remain to be typed. For this, assessee has raised the following ground No.1: - “(a) The corrigendum cum order passed u/s. 154

AMIT CAPITAL & SECURITIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3443/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2006-07 Amit Capital & Securities Income Tax Officer Private Limited, Range-2(1)(1), बनाम/ 47A, 3Rd Floor, Plot No.308, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Hanuman Building, Perin M. K. Road, Nariman Street, Fort, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaaca4219Q "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Govind Jhaveri Shri Satishchandra Rajore-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 04/10/2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2018

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

154 of the Act and proceeding to uphold the levy of penalty even without waiting for the disposal of the rectification application filed by the Appellant. 3. upholding the penalty order passed by the learned AO levying penalty of Rs. 22,62,959/- u/s 271

UNITED INK & VARNISH CO.P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1531/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg: (A.Y : 2010-11) M/S. United Ink & Varnish Vs. Dcit, Range-8(3), Mumbai Co. Pvt. Ltd., (Respondent) 27, Tejpal Scheme Road No. 5, Vile Parle (East), Mumbai – 57. Pan : Aaacu0086F (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Anil SatheFor Respondent: Shri E. Shreedhar
Section 14ASection 154Section 271(1)(c)

rectification of mistake u/s 154 of the Act and there is no material on record to negate the assertions put forth by the assessee. Therefore, in view of the fact-situation canvassed by the assessee, we deem it fit and proper to hold that no penalty u/s 271

ASST CIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI vs. SHAH RUKH KHAN, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 5767/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri N.K.Pradhan, Am Dy. Commissoner Of Income-Tax, Shri Shah Rukh Khan Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai 44-Mannat, B.J. Road, Band बिधम/ (Erstwhile Assistant Commissioner Of Income Stand, Bandra (West), Tax, Central Circle-29, Mumbai) Mumbai-400 050. Vs. R. No. 1918, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aahpk3293L (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin, D.R
Section 112Section 143(2)Section 23(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act on account of long term capital gain offered by the assessee on structured product assessee does not violate the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts P. Ltd 2010 322 ITR 158 SC wherein it has been clearly held that

ACIT CEN CIR 21, MUMBAI vs. PRIME DOWN TOWN ESTATES P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5614/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2006-07 Acit Central Circle-21 M/S Prime Down Town Estates 408, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan Pvt.Ltd., Vs. 11Th Floor, Plaza, Panchasheel M.K.Marg Mumbai-400 020 Hughes Road, 55 Gamdevi Mumbai-400 007 Pan Aaacp2635B (Revenue) (Assessee) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Prime Down Town Estates Dcit Central Circle-21 Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai Vs. 11Th Floor, Plaza, Panchasheel Hughes Road, 55 Gamdevi Mumbai-400 007 Pan Aaacp2635B (Assessee) (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri SashiTulsianFor Respondent: ShriAwungshi Gimson
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 154

rectification u/s 154 and did not tantamount to setting aside of the order of the AO. Accordingly, the plea raised by the revenue is dismissed. Ground No. 2 and 3 are general in nature and do not require any adjudication. 12. The only issue raised in the various grounds of appeal is against theconfirmation of penalty on the aggregate

PRIME DOWN TOWN ESTATE P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 21, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2959/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2006-07 Acit Central Circle-21 M/S Prime Down Town Estates 408, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan Pvt.Ltd., Vs. 11Th Floor, Plaza, Panchasheel M.K.Marg Mumbai-400 020 Hughes Road, 55 Gamdevi Mumbai-400 007 Pan Aaacp2635B (Revenue) (Assessee) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Prime Down Town Estates Dcit Central Circle-21 Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai Vs. 11Th Floor, Plaza, Panchasheel Hughes Road, 55 Gamdevi Mumbai-400 007 Pan Aaacp2635B (Assessee) (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri SashiTulsianFor Respondent: ShriAwungshi Gimson
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 154

rectification u/s 154 and did not tantamount to setting aside of the order of the AO. Accordingly, the plea raised by the revenue is dismissed. Ground No. 2 and 3 are general in nature and do not require any adjudication. 12. The only issue raised in the various grounds of appeal is against theconfirmation of penalty on the aggregate

ITO11(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. S.K. OFFICE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6250/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6250/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer-11(2)(1) M/S. S.K. Office Solutions Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Flat No. 19, 3Rd Floor Room No.425, Aaykar Bhavan M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020. Lalita Society, Gokhale Road Vs. Vile Parle (East), Mumbai-400 049. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-1006-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Chaudhary Arun Kumar- Ld.Dr Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala-Ld. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ : 08/07/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 09/08/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year [In Short Referred To As ‘Ay’] 2010-11 Contest The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai, [In Short Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], Appeal No. Cit(A)-

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Chaudhary Arun Kumar- Ld.DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

rectification orders u/s 154 dated 09/06/2016 and 03/10/2016. 4 M/s. S.K. Office Solutions Private Limited Assessment Year-2010-11 3. Aggrieved, the assessee contested the levy of penalty on legal grounds as well as on merits before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 09/06/2017. The assessee contested the imposition of penalty on legal grounds, inter-alia, by submitting

ANITA KOHLI,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 21(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5799/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5799/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Mrs. Anita J. Kohli, Acit 21(1), बनाम/ Bunglow No. 16, Bkc, C-10, V. Vikas Park, Room No. 601, Jalpanki Co-Op. Soc., Juhu, Bandra (E), Tara Road,, Juhu, Mumbai. Mumbai – 400 049. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aalpk7060M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S.C. Tiwari
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs. 1,97,184/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and the learned CIT(A) directed the AO to look into the facts of the case and directed the AO to dispose of rectification application u/s 154

TATA COMMUNICATION TRANSFORMATION SERVICES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3108/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, A.R. & Ms. Urvi Hemta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.C Omi Ningshen, D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

154 of the Act and proceeding to uphold the levy of penalty even without waiting for the disposal of the rectification application filed by the Appellant. 3. upholding the penalty order passed by the learned AO levying penalty of Rs. 22,62,959/- u/s 271

S.F.DYES /FIRM,MUMBAI vs. A.C.CIRCLE 17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2023/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant ()And Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2013-14 S.F. Dyes/Firm A.C. Circle 17(1), First Floor, Hague Building, 9 Sprott Bandra Kurla Complex Road ,Ballard Estate, Vs. Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400001. Pan No. Aacfs 5153 J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shiv Prakash, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Hoshang B. Irani, DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35(1)(ii)

rectification order passed us 154 did not specity the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c), thus the penalty

SUNANDA V AGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO 21(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5834/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5834/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Mrs. Sunanda V. Agarwala, Income Tax Officer – बनाम/ Damini, Flat No. 301, 21(2)(4), V. 3 Rd Floor, C-10, 5 Th Floor, Juhu Tara Road, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Juhu, Bkc, Bandra (East), Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 051. Mumbai – 400 049. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ablpa9852A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Vishwas Jadhav (D.R.)
Section 10(38)Section 112(1)Section 154Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

penalty order dated 29.05.2012 passed by the A.O. u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee filed her first appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 4. Before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that rectification application u/s 154

SUNIL GAVASKAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for Asst

ITA 5104/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri. D.V. LakhaniFor Respondent: Shri. A.K.Kardam
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80R

271(1)(c) may be deleted. Assessment Year: 2001-02 & 2002-03 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal has deleted the additions in quantum appeal (ITA No. 3970/Mum/2010 for the A.Y. 2001-02 & ITA No. 3971/Mum/2010 for the A.Y. 2002-03) vide order dated 16/03/2016. Therefore, the penalty appeal

SUNIL GAVASKAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for Asst

ITA 5105/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri. D.V. LakhaniFor Respondent: Shri. A.K.Kardam
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80R

271(1)(c) may be deleted. Assessment Year: 2001-02 & 2002-03 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal has deleted the additions in quantum appeal (ITA No. 3970/Mum/2010 for the A.Y. 2001-02 & ITA No. 3971/Mum/2010 for the A.Y. 2002-03) vide order dated 16/03/2016. Therefore, the penalty appeal

SUNIL GAVASKAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for Asst

ITA 5103/MUM/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri. D.V. LakhaniFor Respondent: Shri. A.K.Kardam
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80R

271(1)(c) may be deleted. Assessment Year: 2001-02 & 2002-03 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal has deleted the additions in quantum appeal (ITA No. 3970/Mum/2010 for the A.Y. 2001-02 & ITA No. 3971/Mum/2010 for the A.Y. 2002-03) vide order dated 16/03/2016. Therefore, the penalty appeal

M/S. BIO- VET INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT 25(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5327/MUM/2007[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2017AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5327/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-99) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3084/Mum/2009 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-99) M/S Bio-Vet Industries, Dcit – 25(1), बनाम/ Shantivilla, C-11, Pratyasha Kar V. Nr. St. Lawrence School, Bhavan, Devidas Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex, Borivali (W), Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 103. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadfb 3600 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Asyharzain V.P. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 80l

rectification application moved by the assessee u/s 154 of the Act is not maintainable as it is beyond the limited scope and mandate of Section 154 of the Act which is to correct only mistakes apparent from records. We uphold the appellate order of learned CIT(A) in which we donot find any infirmity and dismiss the appeal