Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.51 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Bhandari Silk Store on 23 September, 2010

Kamala Shiva Kumar, Secunderabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), ... on 3 May, 2021

Budhewal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 92/[2008] 171 Taxman 173 held 'dismissing the appeal, that the society had paid advance tax as well as self-assessment tax not taking into account the deduction claimed under s. 80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Act. It was evident from the facts that the assessee's claim was bona fide and that all the particulars relating, to the computation of income had been disclosed. Thus, the Tribunal rightly cancelled the penalty levied. 9.4 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhandari Silk Store. [2011] 337 ITR 153/[2012] 20 taxmann.com 439 held that 'the Tribunal while upholding the deletion of penalty on surrender of Rs. 2 lakhs had categorically recorded that the surrender related to the stocks included under the definition of other valuable articles of things and that the condition enumerated under Expln. 5 to s. 271(1)(c) were fulfilled. It was also not disputed that the statement of the assessee was recorded under s. 132(4) of the Act on the date of search. Therefore, the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) cancelling the penalty on Rs. 2 lakhs. It had been noticed by the Tribunal that the assessee had disclosed the amount of Rs. 1,25,000 at the time the search party was learning the premises of the assessee. It was further recorded that the time for filing the return of income for the asst. yr. 1989-90 under s. 139(1) had not expired on the date of search and the assessee having disclosed the amount of Rs. 1,25,000 in the return filed for the asst. yr. 1989-90 and paid all taxes could not be held to have concealed the particulars of income which were liable to penalty under s. 271(1)(c). The Tribunal was, thus, right in upholding the cancellation of penalty on this amount as well'.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ramaroa Madhavarapu , Hyderabad vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 15 June, 2021

9.4 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhandari Silk Store. [2011] 337 ITR 153/[2012] 20 taxmann.com 439 held that 'the Tribunal while upholding the deletion of penalty on surrender of Rs. 2 lakhs had categorically recorded that the surrender related to the stocks included under the definition of other valuable articles of things and that the condition enumerated under Expln. 5 to s. 271(1)(c) were fulfilled. It was also not disputed that 6 ITA No.758/Hyd/2019 Sri Rama Rao Madhavarapu, Hyd. AY 2014-15 the statement of the assessee was recorded under s. 132(4) of the Act on the date of search.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vee Gee Industrial Enterprises, ... vs Acit, Faridabad on 26 May, 2017

12. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhandari Silk Store reported in 337 ITR 153, he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in said decision has held that where the return of income filed u/s 153A is accepted by the Assessing Officer, there will be no concealment of income and consequently penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 16 - Cited by 41 - Full Document

Neeraj Jain, Karnal vs Assessee on 12 November, 2010

6. We have heard the rival contentions in light of the material produced and precedent relied upon. The assessee in the submissions has mentioned that the thrust of the impugned assessment order has been that the assessee has failed to produce the stock register or supply quantitative details of timber sold. In light of the aforesaid failure, the Assessing Officer, resorted to the provisions of Section 145(3) read with Section 144 of the Act and proceeded to assess the taxable income of the assessee at an adhoc rate of 4.9% of the turnover of the assessee during the relevant previous year. In this regard, assessee submitted that mere absence 11 ITA NO. 289/Del/2011 of a stock register cannot, per se, be basis for framing assessment under section 144/145 of the Act. This would be particularly so when the appellant explained that preparation / maintenance of quantitative details of consumption is not practically feasible. For this proposition, the assessee has relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of C.I.T. vs. Shere Punjab Silk Stores 1981 Tax 63(1); Veeriah Reddiar vs. C.I.T. : 38 ITR 52 (Ker.); Ashoke Refractories (P) Limited : 279 ITR 457 (Cal.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1