Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Dy.CIT v. Heart Foundation of India ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record –Territorial jurisdiction- Rectification application filed by the Revenue to quash the order of Mumbai Tribunal on the ground that the Mumbai Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and the appeal should have been filed before the ITAT at Pune is dismissed . [ S. 12A , 127 ]

Dhanraj Ramchandra Chandwani v. ITO (Pune)(Trib) (UR)

S. 272A : Penalty-Failure to answer questions-Sign statements-Furnish information-No notice were received-Sufficient and reasonable cause for non-attendance-Without providing sufficient time to reply cannot be treated as non-compliance u/s.272A(1)(d)-Penalty is deleted. [S. 272A(1)(d)]

Shilpa Shetty Kundra v. DCIT [2025] 173 taxmann.com 342 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 272A : Penalty-Failure to answer questions-Sign statements-Furnish information-The penalty cannot be imposed when AO expresses satisfaction with the assessee’s compliance.[S. 272A(1)(d)]

Panda Infratech Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2025) 233 TTJ 356 (Cuttack) (Trib)

S. 271AAB:Peanlty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-
Assessment completed u/s. 143(3)-Addition made-Reopening u/s. 147-Again additions made-Two penalty proceedings for both addition-Merging of penalty is not valid-Not specifying the charge-Barred by limitation-Penalty order is quashed. [S. 274,275].

Sudesh Gupta v. ACIT. [2025] 121 ITR 1/ 210 ITD 436 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-No specific limb in penalty notice-Penalty order is set aside.[S. 274]

Mumbai Educational Trust v. DCIT (E) [2025] 210 ITD 608 (Mum)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Depreciation-The Charitable trust voluntarily withdrew the depreciation claim, and there is no deliberate concealment or misrepresentation, penalty-Penalty is deleted.[S. 11, 32]

Sudesh Gupta v. ACIT (2025) 210 ITD 436 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the limb of penalty-Penalty order is quashed and set aside. [S. 274]

Kamaluddin Popatlal Surani v. PCIT (2025) 233 TTJ 393 (Surat) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Income from other sources-Purchase of immoveable property-difference in actual sale price and the stamp duty value-Addition of total stamp duty value-Matter remanded to CIT for further verification. [S. 56(2)(x), 69A]

Sanjjay Saumyha (Mrs.) v. PCIT (2025) 210 ITD 337 (Chennai) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Income from other sources-Interest-Zero coupon debentures redeemable after 9 years to its directors-Premature converted in to equity-Interest amount deemed to be received upon conversion of debentures in to equity shares in relevant assessment year-Revision order is justified. [S. 2(24)(iv) 47(x),47(x)(a), 49(2), 56v 145]

Sophos Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 210 ITD 614 (Ahd.) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Outstanding GST-Revision order is affirmed-Registration and provision for warranty-Revision is not justified. [S. 14A,37(1) 43B]