045 DTR 0281 CIT v. Dwarkadhish Investment (P) Ltd., Bharti Syntex Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

52 DTR 73Reported decision2011#21027 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132(1)Section 139 Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144 Section 153A Section 153C Section 250

Judgments citing 045 DTR 0281 CIT v. Dwarkadhish Investment (P) Ltd., Bharti Syntex Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna vs. M/S Maxxon Vanijya & Resources Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the order of the Ld

ITA 89/PAT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153CSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA ‘DB’ BENCH AT KOLKATA [Virtual Court] Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 89/PAT/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna M/s. Maxxon Vanijya & Vs. Resources Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AACCM3143M Appearances: Department represented by : Md. Shadab Ahmed, CIR(DR). Assessee represented by : Sudeep Sinha, Adv. Date of concluding the hearing : 13-October-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 08-December-2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Revenue is ag…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 178/JPR/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(1)Section 148

…159 Taxman 306 Jafferali K Rattonsey 53 SOT 220 Nipuan Auto P Ltd 89 DTR 342 Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd and others 68 DTR 38 Dolphine Marbles (P) Ltd 57 DTR 58 Dadhimati Syntex P Ltd 259/Jodh/2013 Dt 31/7/13. Hon’ble ITAT Jodhpur Bench Bharti Syntex Ltd 52 DTR 73 ( Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench) 3.3.2.2 Further, I also find that the established legal position on the subject under consideration as adopted in a large number of case laws is as follows:- (i) As held in the case of R.B. Mittal v. CIT 246 ITR 283 (AP) in an enquiry u/s 68 of the Act, the rule of audi alteram parterm has to be observed and the asses…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 177/JPR/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(1)Section 148

…159 Taxman 306 Jafferali K Rattonsey 53 SOT 220 Nipuan Auto P Ltd 89 DTR 342 Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd and others 68 DTR 38 Dolphine Marbles (P) Ltd 57 DTR 58 Dadhimati Syntex P Ltd 259/Jodh/2013 Dt 31/7/13. Hon’ble ITAT Jodhpur Bench Bharti Syntex Ltd 52 DTR 73 ( Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench) 3.3.4 Further, I also find that the established legal position on the subject under consideration as adopted in a large number of case laws is as follows:- (i) As held in the case of R.B. Mittal v. CIT 246 ITR 283 (AP) in an enquiry u/s 68 of the Act, the rule of audi alteram parterm has to be observed and the assesse…

Choice Buildestate Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, ground no.2 taken by the assessee company is allowed

ITA 431/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar &For Respondent: Shri Ran Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 132(4)Section 139(2)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…Pharmaceuticals Ltd - ITA No. 208/JP/2014 dated 24.04.2016.  Shalimar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (ITAT Jaipur) (2015) 45 DTR 185  Bharti Syntex Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax ITA No. 172 & 173/JP/2010 (2011) 137 TTJ (Jb)82: (2011) 52 DTR 73  CIT vs. Bhaval Synthetics (2013) 84 DTR 449 (Raj.)  CIT vs. Supertech Diamond Tools Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 229 Taxman 62 (Rajasthan High Court)  Shri Barakha Synthetics Ltd. vs. ACIT (2006) 155 Taxman 239 (Raj.)  CIT vs. Diving Leasing and Finance Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (SC)  CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd. (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC)  CIT vs. Lovely Export…