Forum
Read and express views
× Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India

These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.

11-03-2020, Amrapali Zodiac Developers, Section 271C, 201(1A), Tribunal Delhi

  • amit
  • amit's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Administrator
More
1 year 7 months ago #12365 by amit
Section - 271C, 201(1A)
Order Date - 11-03-2020
Favouring - Allowed for statistical purposes
Court - Tribunal Delhi
Appellant - Amrapali Zodiac Developers Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent - ITO
Justice - R.K. PANDA AM & SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA JM
Citation - 320Taxpundit566
Appeal No. - ITA No. 3623/Del/2017
Asstt. Year - 2012-13

Order

PER : R.K. PANDA

These six appeals have been filed by the above named assessees against separate impugned orders of even date i.e. 20.2.2017 in the case of Amrapali Zodiac Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Amrapali Sapphire Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Amrapali Princely Estate Pvt. Ltd. v ITO and separate impugned orders dated 21.02.2017 in the case of Amrapali Zodiac Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. JCIT, Amrapali Sapphire Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. JCIT Amrapali Princely Estate Pvt. Ltd. vs. JCIT passed by The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 41, New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. The Grounds of appeal of the above appeals are as under:-

2.1 ITA No. 3623/Del/2017

1. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in passing exparte order.

2. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not providing proper opportunity to the assessee.

3. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is against the principles of natural justice.

4. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of assessing officer of treating the assesee as ‘an assessee in default.”

5. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the CIT(A) erred n confirming the action of assessing officer of holding that the assesee was liable to deduct TDDS on payment of Rs. 1,43,61,361/-

6. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer of creating demand of Rs. 19,53,145/- (Rs. 14,36,136/- on account of alleged TDS and Rs 5,17,009/- on account of alleged interest u/s 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961)

7. On the facts and circumstances of case in law, the order passed by the assessing officer is contrary to the judgments of jurisdiction Delhi High Court.

The appellant craves leave to add one or more ground of appeal or to alter/modify the existing ground before or at the time of hear ng of appeal.

2.2 ITA No. 3624/Del/2017

1. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in passing exparte order.

2. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not providing proper opportunity to the assessee.

3. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is against the principles of natural justice.

4. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 19,53,145/- imposed by the assessing officer under section 271C of the Income Tax Act 1961.

7. On the facts and circumstances of case in law, the order passed by the assessing officer is contrary to the judgments of jurisdiction Delhi High Court.

The appellant craves leave to add one or more ground of appeal or to alter/modify the existing ground before or at the time of hearing of appeal.

2.3 ITA No. 3625/Del/2017

1. On the facts and circumstances of ase and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in passing exparte order.

2. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not providing proper opportunity to the assessee.

3. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is against the principles of natural justice.

4. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of assessing officer of treating the assesee as ‘an assessee in default.”

5. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the CIT(A) erred n confirming the action of assessing officer of holding that the assesee was liable to deduct TDS on payment of Rs. 1,91,45,700/-

6. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer of creating demand of Rs. 26,32,534/- (Rs. 19,14,570/- on account of alleged TDS and Rs. 7,17,964/- on account of alleged interest u/s 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961)

7. On the facts and circumstances of case in law, the order passed by the assessing officer is contrary to the judgments of jurisdiction Delhi High Court.

Click to view and download Full Free Judgement of Amrapali Zodiac Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO

Unable to display Google Map.




Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.097 seconds

If You Appreciate What We Do Here On TaxPundit, You Should Consider:

We are thankful for your never ending support.

Latest Analysis - High Courts

PCIT vs. Nathji Goverdhan Nathji Charitable Trust

PCIT vs. Nathji Goverdhan Nathji Charitable Trust

PCIT vs. Nathji Goverdhan Nathji Charitable Trust Read More
PCIT vs. Eight Roads Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd.

PCIT vs. Eight Roads Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd.

PCIT vs. Eight Roads Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. Read More
EXPERION DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. vs. ACIT

EXPERION DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. vs. ACIT

EXPERION DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. vs. ACIT Read More
PCIT vs. MLS CBRE SOUTH ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED

PCIT vs. MLS CBRE SOUTH ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED

PCIT vs. MLS CBRE SOUTH ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50

Forum Features

Latest Case Laws
Latest Case Laws are instantly updated in the Forum into their respective section
Latest from CBDT
Latest Circulars, Notifications, Orders etc. from CBDT is updated in the Forum
Ask Experts
You can ask questions to the community
Support
Support queries are either replied via mail or in the Forum so that others can be benefited
Press Releases
Latest Press Notes and Press Releases are updated in the Forum
Connect with Members
You can connect with our community members by replying to their queries

Recommended Articles

 

SITE INFORMATION

All content herein is the copyright of Taxpundit. No images, text, or any other content may be, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of Taxpundit.

All Rights Reserved. All Content Copyright.

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest developments and special offers!

Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme announced in Union Budget, 2020. Download Now
Toggle Bar