OPTIONS DEVELOPRS AND BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CE CIR 22, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the ld

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2010-11 Options Developers & Acit, Central Circle-22, Builders, Room No.465, बनाम/ 10, Mithila Shopping Centre Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ground Floor, V. M. Road, M.K. Road, Juhu Scheme Vile Parle (W) Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400049 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaafo6752F "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Vijay Kothari Ms. Sudha Ramchandran-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 05/05/2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1). (4) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,— (a ) "undisclosed income" means— (i) any income

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DICT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

undisclosed income before the date of the search. before the date of the search. The Swaran Nadhan Salaria ITA No. 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054/MUM/2025 assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

undisclosed income before the date of the search. before the date of the search. The Swaran Nadhan Salaria ITA No. 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054/MUM/2025 assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

undisclosed income before the date of the search. before the date of the search. The Swaran Nadhan Salaria ITA No. 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054/MUM/2025 assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

undisclosed income before the date of the search. before the date of the search. The Swaran Nadhan Salaria ITA No. 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054/MUM/2025 assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice under assessee in the return of income filed in response

MAHESH M. GANDHI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 20(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2976/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Mahesh M. Gandhi, Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ 303/304, Sholay Income Tax – 20(2), V. Apartments, Mumbai. Raheja Complex, Seven Bungalows, Versova, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 061. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpg3545P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

undisclosed there was no intent to avoid tax and therefore, if he holds there is no concealment of income, then question of imposing penalty would not arise. It may be a case of not disclosing income without any intent to avoid tax; it may be a case of furnishing particulars without any intention to avoiding tax. Both stand

DCIT CEN CIR 44, MUMBAI vs. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

271 AAA (2), as the assessee has declared the same under statement recorded u/s 132(4) and fulfilled all the conditions stipulated in the said section. Under the circumstances the penalty proceedings initiated requires to be dropped ." It was observed by the A.O. that the assessee has only highlighted the undisclosed income

SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 44, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

271 AAA (2), as the assessee has declared the same under statement recorded u/s 132(4) and fulfilled all the conditions stipulated in the said section. Under the circumstances the penalty proceedings initiated requires to be dropped ." It was observed by the A.O. that the assessee has only highlighted the undisclosed income

SUCCESS DEVELOPERS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 10, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5608/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

u/s. 271(1)(c), the undisputed facts that lead to the levy of penalty levied by the AO are as under: a. Upon confrontation of the noting found in the spiral note book during the course of survey proceedings, the director of the appellant explained the recording of undisclosed income

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

undisclosed income of Rs.1,98,000 determined by AO and further erred in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect

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

271(1)(c) when there was no material with the AO to arrive at satisfaction about concealment." 4.4.1. Relying on the above precedents, Ld. Counsel submitted that the penalty proceedings need to be dropped on the income returned since the appellant had suo motto declared the additional income in the return filed u/s. 153A and before the assessment proceedings commenced

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

271(1)(c) when there was no material with the AO to arrive at satisfaction about concealment." 4.4.1. Relying on the above precedents, Ld. Counsel submitted that the penalty proceedings need to be dropped on the income returned since the appellant had suo motto declared the additional income in the return filed u/s. 153A and before the assessment proceedings commenced

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

271(1)(c) when there was no material with the AO to arrive at satisfaction about concealment." 4.4.1. Relying on the above precedents, Ld. Counsel submitted that the penalty proceedings need to be dropped on the income returned since the appellant had suo motto declared the additional income in the return filed u/s. 153A and before the assessment proceedings commenced

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” ” 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, which relat which relates to Ground No. 6, is reproduced as under: , is reproduced as under: Shri Sanjay Shantilal

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 (3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” ” 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, which relat which relates to Ground No. 6, is reproduced as under: , is reproduced as under: Shri Sanjay Shantilal

ORBIT CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all three assessment years i

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

undisclosed source of income and therefore, penalty on such account is justified. Further, it may be referred that similar issue was examined and decided by me in appeal order dated 27.09.2017 for A.Y. 2009-10 of this appellant only wherein after examining the facts of the case, the issue of imposition of penalty u/s 271

ORBIT CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all three assessment years i

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

undisclosed source of income and therefore, penalty on such account is justified. Further, it may be referred that similar issue was examined and decided by me in appeal order dated 27.09.2017 for A.Y. 2009-10 of this appellant only wherein after examining the facts of the case, the issue of imposition of penalty u/s 271

ORBIT CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all three assessment years i

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

undisclosed source of income and therefore, penalty on such account is justified. Further, it may be referred that similar issue was examined and decided by me in appeal order dated 27.09.2017 for A.Y. 2009-10 of this appellant only wherein after examining the facts of the case, the issue of imposition of penalty u/s 271

RHEAL SOFTWARE P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Rheal Software Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Cit-8(3), Mumbai. 901, Premium Tower, Vs. Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aabcr8008B Appellant Respondent

undisclosed sources followed by revised returns filed on 31-3-1989. The Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that the assessee was guilty of concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars in the original returns of income and for this purpose, apart from the factum of the assessee having declared the amounts standing to the credit of the family members