VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

set aside the order of penalty”. 21. In view of the above submitted facts and settled law position, it was submitted by the ld AR that the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) is wrong, unwarranted, bad in law as the concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, are different defaults and they cannot be intermixed

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

set aside the order of penalty”. 21. In view of the above submitted facts and settled law position, it was submitted by the ld AR that the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) is wrong, unwarranted, bad in law as the concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, are different defaults and they cannot be intermixed

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

set aside”.\nThe Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Virendra M. Shanklesha,\nMumbai v. Assessee (ITA No. 6431 to 6433/Mum/2010) held as under:\n\"5.3 It is clear from the record that the additional income admitted in the return\nfiled u/s 153A is not because of some bogus or an absolutely wrong claim; but\nbecause of some error

SMT. SHIPRA JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty so levied u/s 271(1)(c) is hereby deleted and appeals are allowed

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or Smt. Shipra Jain & Sh. Sapna Jain, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur reassessment and the said order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under clause (c) of sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation

SUPERFINE HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6,, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

set up new plant and\nmachinery-AO rejected same claim and also levied penalty @\n300% u/s 271(1)(c)—CIT(A) dismissed claim of deduction u/s 80-\nIA, however cancelled penalty-Tribunal upheld order of\nCIT(A)—Held, unit in question at Kundaim Industrial Estate was\nnew industrial undertaking, manufacturing much wider range of\nproducts-Assessee was under bona-fide

RAMESH CHAND BANSAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, AJMER

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

set-aside to the AO. 17 Shri Ramesh Chand Bansal vs DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer 4. Immunity u/s 271AAA(2) available: Alternatively, If it is held that the present matter attracted the provisions of Sec. 271AAA, the assessee shall be entitled to immunity granted u/s 271AAA(2) for the simple reason that all the conditions laid there under stood fulfilled