Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iii v....

The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iii v. Vijaykumar Hariram Malani (Huf

High Court 01 Oct 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iii v. Vijaykumar Hariram Malani (Huf
Date of order
01 Oct 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iii v. Vijaykumar Hariram Malani (Huf, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Short question raised in both these appeals is whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Decision: Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEETIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAYBENCH AT NAGPUR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.62 of 2009. The Commissioner of Income Tax - III..vs..Vijaykumar Hariram Malani (HUF) INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.64 of 2009. The Commissioner of Income Tax - III..vs..Vijaykumar Hariram Malani (HUF) =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Court's or Judges OrderCoram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr.Anand Parchure Adv. for the appellant.Mr.A.S.Jaiswal, Adv. for the respondent. C ORAM : J.P.DEVADHAR AND A.B.CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATED: 1[st] October , 2010. Short question raised in both these appeals is whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Perusal of para nos.5 and 6 of the order of the Tribunal show that the transaction in question was a genuine transaction and the amount was not given as a loan or deposit but it was given as a temporary adjustment between individual and Karta of HUF. pzc The finding recorded by the Tribunal is a finding of fact. No substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan