Search: penalty u/s 271

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)7 Section 2744 Section 133A4 Section 143(3)3 Penalty3 Addition to Income3 Section 69A2 Section 2712 Section 452 Unexplained Cash Credit2 Depreciation2 Disallowance2

SHRI LALJI PURSHOTTAM DABHOYYA PATEL,ALTINHO vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 339/PAN/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2006-07 Ito, Vs. Shri Lalji Purshottam Dabhoyya Ward 1(1), Patel, Panaji, Hill View, Althinho, Goa. Panaji, Goa- 403 001. Pan: Abapd1169Q Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Lalji Purshottam Vs. Acit, Dabhoyya Patel, Circle -1(1), Hill View, Althinho, Panaji, Panaji, Goa- 403 001. Goa. Pan: Abapd1169Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.08.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Panaji-1, Dated 31.05.2018 For Assessment Year 2007-08. Ita Nos.361 & 339/Pan/2018 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Civil Contractor Carrying On The Business At Panaji, Goa. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring The Total Income At Rs.9,02,333/-. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Making The Following Additions:- I) Unexplained Cash Credit - Rs.27,33,000.00 Ii) Unconfirmed Creditors - Rs. 6,30,000.00 Iii) Depreciation Disallowance - Rs. 1,03,697.00

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 45

Unexplained Cash Credit - Rs.27,33,000.00 ii) Unconfirmed creditors - Rs. 6,30,000.00 iii) Depreciation disallowance - Rs. 1,03,697.00 3. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), PANAJI vs. SHRI LALJI PURUSHOTTAM BABHOYYA PATEL, ALTINHO

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 361/PAN/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2006-07 Ito, Vs. Shri Lalji Purshottam Dabhoyya Ward 1(1), Patel, Panaji, Hill View, Althinho, Goa. Panaji, Goa- 403 001. Pan: Abapd1169Q Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Lalji Purshottam Vs. Acit, Dabhoyya Patel, Circle -1(1), Hill View, Althinho, Panaji, Panaji, Goa- 403 001. Goa. Pan: Abapd1169Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.08.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Panaji-1, Dated 31.05.2018 For Assessment Year 2007-08. Ita Nos.361 & 339/Pan/2018 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Civil Contractor Carrying On The Business At Panaji, Goa. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring The Total Income At Rs.9,02,333/-. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Making The Following Additions:- I) Unexplained Cash Credit - Rs.27,33,000.00 Ii) Unconfirmed Creditors - Rs. 6,30,000.00 Iii) Depreciation Disallowance - Rs. 1,03,697.00

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 45

Unexplained Cash Credit - Rs.27,33,000.00 ii) Unconfirmed creditors - Rs. 6,30,000.00 iii) Depreciation disallowance - Rs. 1,03,697.00 3. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271

LUZITO SEBASTIAO RODRIGUES,SALCETE vs. ITO, INT. TXN. WARD`, PANAJI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 12/PAN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikant

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, to amend, alter/delete and/or modify the above grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing.” 3. It is thus clear that the assessee’s sole substantive ground pleaded in the instant appeal seeks to reverse both the lower authorities action treating the cash