144 ITR 225-237 (SC), CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Pvt. Ltd.

74 ITR 115High Court#16089 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

Judgments citing 144 ITR 225-237 (SC), CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Pvt. Ltd.

Shri Dinesh Sethi, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ludhiana

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 338/CHANDI/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 376/Chd/2014 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Janesh Sethi, Legal Heir Of बनाम The Ito, Late Shri Dinesh Sethi, Ward – 1(1), Vs Prop. M/S R.S. Trading Corp., Ludhiana. C-434, Urban Estate Focal Point, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Aaqpk1200Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.06.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.8.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 376/CHD/2014 and "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Janesh Sethi, Legal Heir of बनाम The ITO, Late Shri Dinesh Sethi, Ward – 1(1), VS Prop. M/s R.S. Trading Corp., Ludhiana. C-434, Urban Estate Focal Point, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AAQPK1200Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh…

Sh. Dinesh Sethi, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ludhiana

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 376/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 376/Chd/2014 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Janesh Sethi, Legal Heir Of बनाम The Ito, Late Shri Dinesh Sethi, Ward – 1(1), Vs Prop. M/S R.S. Trading Corp., Ludhiana. C-434, Urban Estate Focal Point, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Aaqpk1200Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.06.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.8.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 376/CHD/2014 and "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Janesh Sethi, Legal Heir of बनाम The ITO, Late Shri Dinesh Sethi, Ward – 1(1), VS Prop. M/s R.S. Trading Corp., Ludhiana. C-434, Urban Estate Focal Point, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AAQPK1200Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh…

Brijbasi Education and Welfarew Society, Mathura vs. Addl.CIT, Range-1, Ghaziabad

In the result ITA number 4573/del/2017 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4573/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 12Section 143Section 148Section 161Section 68Section 80

…n, reassessment proceedings can be initiated. Reliance is placed on ITO vs. Pusrhottamdas bangur vs another (SC) 224 ITR 362, ITO vs selected Dalrband coal company private limited (SC) 217 ITR 597, Elphonsten picture palace vs Union of India and others (Pat ) 74 ITR 115, H A Nanji and Co vs ITO (Cal) 120 ITR 174, Rattan Gupta vs CIT (Punjab and Haryana) 234 ITR 220 and ITO vs Gurinder Kaur (ITAT, Del,) 102 ITD 189. 5.1.2 Appellant has challenged the proceedings technically that AO did not take prior approval of sea CIT. Examination of fact revealed that the AO took approval of CIT vide satisfaction note dated 26/…

Brijbasi Education and Welfarew Society, Mathura vs. Addl.CIT, Range-1, Ghaziabad

In the result ITA number 4573/del/2017 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4572/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 12Section 143Section 148Section 161Section 68Section 80

…n, reassessment proceedings can be initiated. Reliance is placed on ITO vs. Pusrhottamdas bangur vs another (SC) 224 ITR 362, ITO vs selected Dalrband coal company private limited (SC) 217 ITR 597, Elphonsten picture palace vs Union of India and others (Pat ) 74 ITR 115, H A Nanji and Co vs ITO (Cal) 120 ITR 174, Rattan Gupta vs CIT (Punjab and Haryana) 234 ITR 220 and ITO vs Gurinder Kaur (ITAT, Del,) 102 ITD 189. 5.1.2 Appellant has challenged the proceedings technically that AO did not take prior approval of sea CIT. Examination of fact revealed that the AO took approval of CIT vide satisfaction note dated 26/…

M/S Kunal Calcium Limited, Yamunanagar vs. DCIT, Yamunanagar

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 412/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Feb 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ankur Alya, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 148Section 250(6)

…s valid. Reliance in this regard is also placed on the following case laws:- i) Srinivasa Khandasari Udyog Vs. ITO (ITAT, Bang) 56 ITD 146. ii ITO Vs. Purushotam Das Bangur & Anr. (SC) 224 ITR 362 iii) Elphinstone Picture Palace Vs. Union of India & Anr (Pat) 74 ITR 115 iv) H.A. Nanji & Co.Vs. ITO (Cai) 120 ITR 593 v) Sohan Singh Vs. CIT (Del) 158 ITR 174 vi) Rattan Gupta Vs. CIT (P&H) 234 ITR 220” 7 . W e h a v e h e a r d t h e r i v a l c o n t e n t i o n s c a r e f u l l y a n d p e r u s e d t h e o r d e r s o f t h e a u t h o r i t i e s b e l o w . I n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e a s i s c l e a r l…

Satish Gujral vs. Addl CIT Range -32

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

ITA 3397/DEL/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anima Bernwal, Sr-DR
Section 143(1)Section 80RSection 80U

…hat and AO has abdicated his power to ITO Balasore and has not made any enquiry on his own which is not permissible under law. In this connection, the ld. AR relied on the decisions in the case of 144 ITR 225-237 (SC), CIT vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Pvt. Ltd., 74 ITR 115 (Patna), Elphinstone Picture Palace vs. UOI. The ld. AR vehemently submitted that enquiry by ITO Balasore was made behind the assessee which cannot be used against the assessee in the absence of cross- examination. The ld. AR relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 125 ITR 713 (SC), and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi…

144 ITR 225-237 (SC), CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Pvt. Ltd. (74 ITR 115) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax