138 Taxman.com 199 (Cal.) Jaswantlal J. Shah v. ACIT

128 Taxmann.com 378Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2021#22316 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 124(2)Section 124(3)(a)Section 124(3)(c)Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

Issues it is cited on

previous yearsection 15companysection 14section 143(3)total incomebusiness

Judgments citing 138 Taxman.com 199 (Cal.) Jaswantlal J. Shah v. ACIT

Veerprabhu Auto Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 2(4), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1218/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.:1218/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Veerprabhu Auto Pvt. Ltd. A.C.I.T., CC-2(4), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACL4493K Appearances: Assessee represented by : None. Department represented by : Sandip Sarkar, JCIT, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 28-October-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 12-January-2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income…

Bimal Roy Soni, J L N Marg vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Jaipur, Statue Circle

In the result, appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 240/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 239 & 240/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bimal Roy Soni 11, Chetak Marg, JLN Marg Jaipur cuke Vs. DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur NCR, Building LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFPPS 1588 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a lquokb

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 254

…tional ITAT K. Raheja (P) Ltd. v. DCIT [2022] 142 Taxman.com (Mum.-Trib.) Smt. Yamini Khandelwal v. ACIT [2022] 142 Taxman.com (Kol.-Trib) Principal CIT v. Reliance Chemotex Industries Ltd. [2022] 138 Taxman.com 199 (Cal.) Jaswantlal J. Shah v. ACIT [2021] 128 Taxmann.com 378 (Mum.Trib.) The hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/S. Marg Limited vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Judgment dt. 30.09.2020 in TCA Nos.41 to 43 / 2017) has also held that “The legal position, as interpreted above by various judgments and again reiterated by us in this judgment, remains that the disallowance of expenditure incurred…

Bimal Roy Soni, J L N Marg vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur, N.C.R. Building

In the result, appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 239/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 239 & 240/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bimal Roy Soni 11, Chetak Marg, JLN Marg Jaipur cuke Vs. DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur NCR, Building LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFPPS 1588 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a lquokb

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 254

…tional ITAT K. Raheja (P) Ltd. v. DCIT [2022] 142 Taxman.com (Mum.-Trib.) Smt. Yamini Khandelwal v. ACIT [2022] 142 Taxman.com (Kol.-Trib) Principal CIT v. Reliance Chemotex Industries Ltd. [2022] 138 Taxman.com 199 (Cal.) Jaswantlal J. Shah v. ACIT [2021] 128 Taxmann.com 378 (Mum.Trib.) The hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/S. Marg Limited vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Judgment dt. 30.09.2020 in TCA Nos.41 to 43 / 2017) has also held that “The legal position, as interpreted above by various judgments and again reiterated by us in this judgment, remains that the disallowance of expenditure incurred…