This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not struck off irrelevant limb in penalty notice-Original penalty proceedings are vitiated-Direction to enhance penalty will not survive. [S. 250, 251, 274]

Neelesh Satish Kanade v. ACIT (2022) 214 DTR 345 / 218 TTJ 641 (Pune)(Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Addition on account of deeming provision-Neither concealment of income not furnishing inaccurate particulars of income-Penalty not sustainable. [S.50C]

Virendra Singh Verma v. ITO (2022)95 ITR 83 (SN)(Jaipur) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice issued without specifying limb-Levy of penalty not valid [S. 274]

Vibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2022) 95 ITR 31 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Inadvertently claiming deduction of Corporate Social Responsibility-Suo motu filing revised computation during assessment proceedings.

Sterling Investment Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (A) (2022)95 ITR (SN) 25 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Bogus purchases-Income estimated of 30% of purchases-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid.

Grand Prix Engg. Pvt Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2022) 95 ITR 505(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Penalty Levied by Assessing Officer on two counts of disallowance-Tribunal deleting disallowance on one count and remanding matter on other to Assessing Officer-Deletion of penalty by Commissioner (Appeals) is justified.[S. 10AA]

ACIT v. SJR Commodities and Consulting Pvt. Ltd. (2022)96 ITR 64 (SN) (Mum) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Assessing Officer in body of assessment order initiating proceedings for penalty for default of concealment of income-Imposition of penalty qua solitary addition for both defaults-Levy of penalty is not valid.

Vikash Nashine v Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 68 (SN) (Raipur) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Estimate of income at 20 % of receipts-Levy of penalty is not valid [S. 44BBB]

Lahmeyer Holding Gambh v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 455 (Trib) (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice not specifying the charge for which penalty was being levied-Levy of penalty is not justified.

Dy. CIT v. Scooters India Ltd. (2022) 96 ITR 460 (Lucknow) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Inaccurate particulars of income-Deemed dividend taxed in the hands of assessee-Question in whose hands dividend to be taxed-cannot be subject matter of penalty for irregular particulars of income-Penalty levied incorrect. [2(22)(e)]

ITO v. Chetan Seth (2022) 97 ITR 597 (Delhi) (Trib)