ITO (OSD) (TDS) 3(1), MUMBAI vs. VODAFONE ESSAR LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS VODAFONE INDIA LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, (a) appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02,

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

penalty proceedings, u/s 271(c) of the Act. The Ld. CIT (A) dismissed this ground being premature. 8. In respect of appeals filed by the assessee challenging the interest charged u/s 201(1A) of the Act, the Ld CIT(A) restored the issues to the file of the AO for deciding the same afresh, since the issues relating to demand

ITO (OSD) (TDS) 3(1), MUMBAI vs. VODAFONE ESSAR LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS VODAFONE INDIA LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, (a) appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02,

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

penalty proceedings, u/s 271(c) of the Act. The Ld. CIT (A) dismissed this ground being premature. 8. In respect of appeals filed by the assessee challenging the interest charged u/s 201(1A) of the Act, the Ld CIT(A) restored the issues to the file of the AO for deciding the same afresh, since the issues relating to demand

COAST LINE SHIPPING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CC- 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961, the specific ground which forms the foundation therefor has to be spelt out in clear terms. Otherwise, an assessee would not have proper opportunity to put forth his defence. When the proceedings are penal in nature, resulting in imposition of penalty ranging from 100% to 300% of the tax liability

COAST LINE SHIPPING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CC- 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961, the specific ground which forms the foundation therefor has to be spelt out in clear terms. Otherwise, an assessee would not have proper opportunity to put forth his defence. When the proceedings are penal in nature, resulting in imposition of penalty ranging from 100% to 300% of the tax liability

COAST LINE SHIPPING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CC- 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961, the specific ground which forms the foundation therefor has to be spelt out in clear terms. Otherwise, an assessee would not have proper opportunity to put forth his defence. When the proceedings are penal in nature, resulting in imposition of penalty ranging from 100% to 300% of the tax liability

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

201 (Delhi) wherein penalty for concealment on notional income has been upheld.\n8. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us. With regard to the submissions of the Ld. DR, we find that the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PSB Industries India Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT (supra

MUTHA PARASRAM DHANAJI & CO,KALYAN vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1, THANE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

201, Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Thane, Narayanwadi, Station Road, Vs. Kalyan (W) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.AAFFM5521R "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri H. N. Motiwalla & Shri M. P. Chhajed Shri D.G. Pansari CIT-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by 01/05/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 24/05/2019 आदेश क" तार

MUTHA PARASRAM DHANAJI & CO,KALYAN vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1, THANE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

201, Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Thane, Narayanwadi, Station Road, Vs. Kalyan (W) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.AAFFM5521R "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri H. N. Motiwalla & Shri M. P. Chhajed Shri D.G. Pansari CIT-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by 01/05/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 24/05/2019 आदेश क" तार

MUTHA PARASRAM DHANAJI & CO,KALYAN vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1, THANE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

201, Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Thane, Narayanwadi, Station Road, Vs. Kalyan (W) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.AAFFM5521R "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri H. N. Motiwalla & Shri M. P. Chhajed Shri D.G. Pansari CIT-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by 01/05/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 24/05/2019 आदेश क" तार

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTERAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

201 (Delhi) wherein penalty for concealment\non notional income has been upheld.\n8.\nWe have considered the rival submissions and perused the material\nplaced before us. With regard to the submissions of the Ld. DR, we find that the\ndecision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PSB Industries India Pvt.\nLtd. v/s CIT (supra

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

201 (Delhi) wherein penalty for concealment\non notional income has been upheld.\n8.\nWe have considered the rival submissions and perused the material\nplaced before us. With regard to the submissions of the Ld. DR, we find that the\ndecision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PSB Industries India Pvt.\nLtd. v/s CIT (supra

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTERAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

201 (Delhi) wherein penalty for concealment\non notional income has been upheld.\n8. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material\nplaced before us. With regard to the submissions of the Ld. DR, we find that the\ndecision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PSB Industries India Pvt.\nLtd. v/s CIT (supra

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

201 (Delhi) wherein penalty for concealment\non notional income has been upheld.\n8.\nWe have considered the rival submissions and perused the material\nplaced before us. With regard to the submissions of the Ld. DR, we find that the\ndecision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PSB Industries India Pvt.\nLtd. v/s CIT (supra

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CEN CIR-(2), , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty initiated by the Ld AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act 1961 and the rea Act 1961 and the reason assigned for doing so are son assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUM vs. DCIT, CC-2(2), , MUM

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty initiated by the Ld AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act 1961 and the rea Act 1961 and the reason assigned for doing so are son assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision

DCIT, CC-2(2),, MUM vs. SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty initiated by the Ld AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act 1961 and the rea Act 1961 and the reason assigned for doing so are son assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUM vs. DCIT, CC-2(2),, MUM

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty initiated by the Ld AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act 1961 and the rea Act 1961 and the reason assigned for doing so are son assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC- 2(2), , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty initiated by the Ld AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act 1961 and the rea Act 1961 and the reason assigned for doing so are son assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act wrong and contrary to the provision