1. Bhola Nath Majumdar v. Income Tax Officer

221 ITR 608High Court1996#17249 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2020.

Judgments citing 1. Bhola Nath Majumdar v. Income Tax Officer

M/S Hotel Ajuba Residency, Patiala vs. DCIT, Circle, Patiala

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 829/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jan 2020AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudershan, JCIT
Section 133ASection 142A(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “एस.एम.सी” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, “SMC” CHANDIGARH "ी एन.के.सैनी, उपा"य" BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.829/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s Hotel Ajuba Residency बनाम The DCIT, Circle Near Bhakra Canal, Sangrur Road Patiala, Punjab Patiala, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAFFH3925A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Arvind Sudershan, JCIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 27/01/2020 उदघोषणा…

Shri Krishan Bahadur Saxena, Bhopal vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 684/IND/2016[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2018AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:1997-98

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ecause the purpose for which the valuation report can be utilized, namely, for completion of the assessment in conformity with the valuation report is no longer in existence, the assessment having been completed in the meantime. Bhola Nath Majumdar v.ITO[1996]221 ITR 608(Gauhat(HC) The purpose jar which alone a valuation report can be utilized namely for completion of the assessment in conformity with the valuation report is no longer existent the assessment completed ill having been the meantime. In such circumstances to allow the assailed valuation proceeding to continue. would militate against well-known canon…

Voltas Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 7(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5330/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Voltas Ltd. Ito Wd 7(3)(4) Voltas House-A, Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Dr. Babasheb Ambedkar Vs. Rd, Chincpokli, Mumbai-40020 Mumbai-400033 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaacv2809D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Ito Wd 7(3)(4) Voltas Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Voltas House-A, Dr. Babasheb Ambedkar Rd, Vs. Mumbai-40020 Chincpokli, Mumbai-400033 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaacv2809D Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas (Ar) Revenue By Shri Asghar Zain (Dr)

Section 143(3)Section 154

…ubstituting the amount of sales consideration in the hands of the assessee. The reliance was placed in this regard on the judgment of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. ITO 150 ITR 643 and Bhalanath Majumdar v. ITO 221 ITR 608. It was also submitted that no reference can be made u/s 55A for the purpose of determination of sales consideration on the ground that the expression full value of consideration cannot be construed as having reference to the market value of assets transferred but only means full value of consideration actually received by the transferor. In this…

Govind Agarwal. HUF, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 826/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4531,4566,876,877,878/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2006-07, 2007-08, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2005-06) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Manidevi Agarwal, 720, A- 1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpa 4962 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4528/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal, 701, A-1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adopa 4038 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.873,874/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal(Huf), 720/A-5, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aiepa 3109 A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) 876,828,4566,4547,218/11 &957/13&Co203.13

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…ed assessment based on such DVO’s report. Such reports are mere an opinion of the valuer, the third party and never can be equated to the opinion of the AO and relied on the Guwahati High Court judgment in the case of Bhola Nath Majumdar v. Income-tax Officer 221 ITR 608 and the judgment of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Brig. B. Lall v. Wealth-tax Officer 127 ITR 308. In these cases, the concealment proceedings were quashed on this basis. Referring to the another judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Suraj Devi, 328 ITR 604 and in the case of CIT vs. Naveen Gera [2011] 328 ITR…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Ashwani Kumar Malik, Meerut

ITA 3871/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 143(2)Section 34ASection 55A

…(a) can only be invoked, till the 01.07.2012 when the said provision was amended, if the AO is of the opinion that the value so claimed was less than its fair market value. As held in the case of ITA No. 3871/D/2013 & CO No. 15/D/2014 7 Bhola Nath Mazumdar (221 ITR 608) by the Gauhati High Court, the purpose of section 55A is not empower the AO to make a roving and fishing enquiries. Reference is also invited to the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Dev Kumar Jain (309 ITR 240) which held that in case there was nothing on record to show that an assessee had received a consideration for the sale of…

1. Bhola Nath Majumdar v. Income Tax Officer (221 ITR 608) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax