Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.43 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Scientific Chemicals on 21 June, 2005

Ombhole Transport And Construction, ... vs Assessee on 1 July, 2012

In the case of CIT vs. Scientific Chemicals (2005) 198 CTR 665 (Guj), Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that "when the explanation tendered by the assessee is ignored or omitted from the zone of consideration before the order is made, it would definitely violate the principles of natural justice. The order would be vitiated by exercise of arbitrariness in decision-making process and the discretion cannot be stated to have been exercised judicially." It further held that "when an authority is vested with discretionary powers and omits to take into consideration, the explanation tendered which has admittedly been filed in response to show cause notice, the order would suffer from the vice of non-application of mind when the order records that no explanation is tendered."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Kavita Kapoor vs Income Tax Officer on 11 May, 2007

Relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. G.R. Rajendran and two judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of CIT v. Textile & General Engineering Co. and CIT v. Scientific Chemicals , the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the orders for imposing penalty without considering the explanation of the assessee are liable to be quashed on this ground itself. He further stated that the assessee neither in the past nor in future was being assessed to tax. She did not have any regular source of income. She was totally unaware of her obligation to file the return under the bona fide belief that she was not required to do so. This according to the learned Authorised Representative constituted a reasonable cause for the default under Section 271(1)(a) for which no penalty could be imposed. Thus, the learned Authorised Representative concluded the arguments by saying that orders for imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(a) and 271(1)(c) may be quashed after setting aside the impugned orders of the CIT(A).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar Cites 41 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Manish Organics India Ltd., Ahmedabad vs Department Of Income Tax on 24 November, 2011

In this connection your appellant relies upon the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Scientific Chemicals (2005) 198 CTR (Guj) 661, a copy of which is enclosed herewith as Exhibit-B, wherein the High Court has held that when an explanation to show cause has been furnished and the same is not considered by holding that no explanation is furnished the order of penalty suffers from lack of application of mind and is liable to be quashed. The penalty be cancelled now.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Bhagwati Infrastructures Ltd.,, ... vs The Assistant Commr. Income Tax, ... on 31 August, 2022

5. During the course of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, written submissions dated NIL was filed before us stating that the issue is fully covered matter both on merits as ITA No.469/RJT/2015 4 well as on technical grounds. The assessee relied upon judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Scientific Chemicals, 278 ITR 199 wherein Hon'ble High Court held as follows:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Rajkot Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs M/S. Ecs Environment Pvt. Ltd, ... on 7 December, 2022

4.1 The assessee before the learned CIT(A) submitted that during the penalty proceeding it furnished explanation vide submission dated 09-02-2018 against levy of penalty but the AO without considering the same levied penalty vide order dated 29-06-2018. Therefore, the order imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act without considering the explanation furnished by the assessee is invalid and deserved to be quashed. The assessee in this regard places its reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Scientific Chemicals reported in 198 CTR 665.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shreya Mehul Patel,, Anand vs Assessee on 19 March, 2015

assessee submitted the details before the ld. CIT(A) which is also placed on record at page Nos. 39 and 40 of the paper-book. From the details, it is seen that the assessee has furnished explanation and also the relevant page numbers of the evidences in support of his explanation. We find that the aforesaid submissions were not considered by ld. CIT(A) and it was considered as additional evidences to be not admissible. Here we find that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Scientific Chemicals, (2005) 278 ITR 199 (Guj.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1