Harish Vitthalrao Kale vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Harish Vitthalrao Kale, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee had initially filed a return of income on 03.08.2016 declaring total income at Rs.7,06,040/-. This return was revised on 22.07.2017 to declare total income at Rs.3,82,850/-. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 of the Act on 26.02.2020, to which the assessee responded by filing another return on 23.03.2020 declaring total income at Rs.7,06,750/-. The notice under section 148 was issued due to a survey conducted on 23.08.2019 at the premises of Kishore Patil, the Tax Consultant, who had filed returns claiming bogus deductions. The assessee was found to have claimed excess deductions under Chapter VI-A of the Act, leading to the levy of a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Assessing Officer was justified in levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Ram Garhia Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-63(1), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Rohan Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 21(3), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2006-07Dismissed

• M/s Jewel India Jewellers vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2014-2015Allowed

• Rajesh B. Jain as Legal Heir of Bhanwarlal Jain vs. ITO, Ward-19(1)(1)

• G.D. Goenka Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Central Circle-15

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19Allowed

• Kishan Kumar Gupta vs ITO

  Delhi 'B' Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed