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.

28 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 234clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi371Mumbai202Karnataka120Bangalore65Ahmedabad62Jaipur59Pune28Chandigarh26Kolkata24Chennai23Hyderabad19Nagpur15Cochin11Indore10Lucknow9Cuttack8Agra7Dehradun7Guwahati6Rajkot5Surat5Telangana2Raipur2Rajasthan1Allahabad1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)40Section 143(3)24Addition to Income17Section 153A16Section 153C15Penalty14Section 23413Section 13213Section 234E12Search & Seizure

INTERVALVE POONAWALLA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 636/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14 Intervalve Poonawalla Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle 1(1), Fin Div. 16/B-1, Sarosh Bhavan, Pune Vs. 2Nd Floor, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Opp. Niv, Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaaci3917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Vishnu Bhutada Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 14-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

234/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. He noted that the assessee in its computation of income has disallowed meager amount of Rs.5,000/- as expenditure incurred for earning the dividend income to the tune of Rs.24,57,376/-. The Assessing Officer invoking the provisions of section

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

10
Disallowance8
Business Income8

MS IMSOFER MANUFACTURING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS FERRERO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)– PUNE AND NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PUNE AND NFAC (DELHI)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1316/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1316/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Imsofer Manufacturing Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. India Private Limited (Now Known As Ferrero India Private Limited), World Trade Center, 8Th Floor, Tower-3, Kharadi- 411014. Pan : Aabci6450N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Siddhesh Chaugule & Nagma Gupta Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar : Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.04.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “General Grounds: 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Hon. Cit(A) Has Erred In Passing Order Under Section 250 Of The Act I.E. Levying Penalty Of Inr 3,55,82,949/-. Legal Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &
Section 154Section 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)Section 275(1)(A)

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon. CIT(A) has erred in passing an ex parte order without granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the Appellant thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case

JAGDISH BHAGWAN MIRCHANDANI,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1620/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69A

234/- for investment made in shares and mutual funds and disallowance of Rs.50,000/- on account of expenditure under the head “Wages and other expenses”. On the disallowance of Rs.5,40,000/- on account of addition u/s 69A of the Act, AO vide order dt.27.06.2013 levied penalty of Rs.1,66,860/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1494/PUN/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 127Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 292BSection 68

234 and initiation of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) . [C] General: • The appellant reserve rights to add alter or delete any portion of this appeal before its conclusion. • This appeal is filed in time and may please be allowed in full. • A Detailed paper book along with case laws will be submitted at the time of hearing:.” 5. Briefly

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1493/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 127Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 292BSection 68

234 and initiation of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) . [C] General: • The appellant reserve rights to add alter or delete any portion of this appeal before its conclusion. • This appeal is filed in time and may please be allowed in full. • A Detailed paper book along with case laws will be submitted at the time of hearing:.” 5. Briefly

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1492/PUN/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 127Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 292BSection 68

234 and initiation of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) . [C] General: • The appellant reserve rights to add alter or delete any portion of this appeal before its conclusion. • This appeal is filed in time and may please be allowed in full. • A Detailed paper book along with case laws will be submitted at the time of hearing:.” 5. Briefly

PRAPHULL KALURAM SHIVALE,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 12,, PUNE

ITA 490/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 490/Pun/2019 करिनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Praphull Kaluram Shivale, 234, Balu Shetpabal Road, Vadhu Budruk, Shirur,Pune – 412216 Pan :Bfqps4176B . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 12, Pune . . . . . . . ""थ" / Respondent "ारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri B. C. Malakar Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing :16/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement :26/08/2022 आदेश / Order Per G.D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Appellant Assessee Is Challenged Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 14/02/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which In Turn Dove Out Of Order Of Penalty [For Short “Po”] Of Asstt. Commission Of Income Tax, Circle-12 Pune [For Short “Ao”] Dt.28/06/2018 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 14

For Appellant: Shri B. C. MalakarFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43C

234, Balu Shetpabal Road, Vadhu Budruk, Shirur,Pune – 412216 PAN :BFQPS4176B . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 12, Pune . . . . . . . ""थ" / Respondent "ारा / Appearances Assessee by : Shri B. C. Malakar Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing :16/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement :26/08/2022 आदेश / ORDER PER G.D. PADMAHSHALI

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 931/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

Section 201Section 234Section 234ESection 246ASection 250

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 930/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

Section 201Section 234Section 234ESection 246ASection 250

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 929/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

Section 201Section 234Section 234ESection 246ASection 250

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

KALAVATI HANUMANDAS AGRAWAL,,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, DHULE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1323/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Shabana Parveen
Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

234/-. At the end of the assessment, the Assessing Officer assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs.16,66,720/- after making certain additions. Further, the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceeding in respect of an addition of Rs.74,486/- u/s 14A of the Act stating that “….. it is a case of concealed income/unexplained particulars of expenditure …..” (both

IMERYS NEWQUEST (INDIA) P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 590/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 590/Pun/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agiwal
Section 143(3)

u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C (13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2 A.Y. 2010-11 2. The brief facts of the case as emanating from records are: The assessee-company is a joint venture of Imerys Group and Ballarpur Industries Group for manufacturing of Wet Ground Calcium Carbonate (WGCC), a chemical used

GULAB BADGUJAR,,THANE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on technical

ITA 2150/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2150/Pun/2016 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 132Section 139Section 153CSection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. In the First Appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty levied by the AO. Contents of Para Nos. 2.2.7 to 2.2.11 of the order of CIT(A) are relevant. 5. Aggrieved with the confirmation of the penalty by the CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal with

YOGITA BADGUJAR,,THANE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on technical

ITA 2151/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2150/Pun/2016 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 132Section 139Section 153CSection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. In the First Appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty levied by the AO. Contents of Para Nos. 2.2.7 to 2.2.11 of the order of CIT(A) are relevant. 5. Aggrieved with the confirmation of the penalty by the CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal with

KNORR-BREMSE TECHNOLOGY CENTRE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DY. CIT, CIRCLE-14,, PUNE

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1957/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia &For Respondent: Shri Shivaji B. More
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

234 A of the Act, despite of the original return of income filed within due date by the Appellant. 11. Initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 read with section 271(l)(c) of the Act on additions made to the total income Erred on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law in initiating penalty proceedings against

LATE SHRI BABANLAL B AGARWAL,,JALGAON vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JALGAON

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1427/PUN/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2019AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Munde
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

234 B of the I. T. Act 1961 and hence the impugned interest levied may please be deleted. 6. The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal. The appellant submits his sincere apologies for inconvenience caused

ANIL BABANLAL AGRAWAL,,JALGAON vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 300/PUN/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2019AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Munde
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

234 B of the I. T. Act 1961 and hence the impugned interest levied may please be deleted. 6. The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal. The appellant submits his sincere apologies for inconvenience caused

SADASHIVRAO MANDLIK KAGAL TALUKA SAH. SAKHAR KARKHAN LTD,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, KOLHAPUR

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1569/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sadashivrao Mandlik Kagal Tal. Vs. Acit, Sah. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Circle-1, Sushant S. Phadnis C.A., 613 E Kolhapur Ward, Phadnis Chambers, Shahupuri, 1St Lane, Kolhapur – 416003 Pan : Aaaak1300Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

u/s. 80P (2) (a) (iii) when the issue was fully, covered in the assesses favour by the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Budhewal Co.op. Sugar Mills Ltd. as reported in 315 ITR 351. 6) On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on merit

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1245/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

section 132B of the Act, case laws on the issue and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue by observing as under:- “7. We find that the subsequent action of Learned AO in revoking the credit given for seized cash towards existing tax liability under proceedings u/s 154 of the Act is illegal. The provisions of section 132B

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, KOLHAPUR vs. VIJAYKUMAR RAJARAM SHAH,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 608/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

section 132B of the Act, case laws on the issue and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue by observing as under:- “7. We find that the subsequent action of Learned AO in revoking the credit given for seized cash towards existing tax liability under proceedings u/s 154 of the Act is illegal. The provisions of section 132B