145 Taxman 530 (Del) CIT v. Globe Sales Corporation

160 ITR 94High Court1986#22892 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,487 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Judgments citing 145 Taxman 530 (Del) CIT v. Globe Sales Corporation

Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

…ii) 291 ITR 519 (SC) Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT iv) 292 ITR 11 (SC) T. Ashok Pai v. CIT v) 190 Taxman 157 (Del) CIT v. Arctic Investment (P) Ltd. vi) 145 Taxman 530 (Del) CIT v. Globe Sales Corporation vii) 219 ITR 267 (Del) CIT v. J. K. Synthetics Limited viii) 160 ITR 94 (AP) (FB) CIT V. H. Abdul Bakshi ix) 219 CTR 447 (Kar) Bhadra Advancing (P) Ltd. v. ACIT x) 241 ITR 124 (MP) affirmed in 251 ITR 9 (SC) CIT v. Suresh Chandra Mittal "It is well settled that under section 271(1)(e) the initial burden lies on the Revenue to establish that the assessee had concealed the income or had furnished inaccurate particulars…

Rasal Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 287/JPR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Mar 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Us. 2 M/S Rasal Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Shivpuri (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhari (Addl.CIT) a

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

…gth is drawn from the following case laws: 1) Krishan Lal Shiv Chand Rai v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 293 (P&H); 2) CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [1996] 219 ITR 267 (Del.); 3)Muniappa Gounder (B) v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 787 (Mad. 4) CIT v. Abdul Bakshi & Bros. (H) [1986] 160 ITR 94 (AP) (FB); 5) CIT v. Doris S. Luiz [1974] 96 ITR 646 (Ker.). 8 M/s Rasal Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO It has also been held that an assessee is entitled to submit fresh evidence in the course of penalty proceedings. It is because penalty proceedings are independent proceedings. The Tribunal ,in the case of Prasanna Enterprises v. CIT […

M/S Shiv Kumar Sushil Kumar Tea Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 75/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B.L. Bhojwani (CA)For Respondent: Shri Kailash Mangal (Addl.CIT)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 80ASection 80ISection 80J

…in assessment proceedings for determining or computing the tax is not conclusive, and the assessee may establish his case during penalty proceedings even though addition made in assessment has been accepted. They referred to CIT v. Abdul Bakshi & Bros. (1986) 160 ITR 94 (AP) that penalty proceedings are entirely distinct from assessment proceedings. 4. The ld AR has further contended that since all material and facts relevant to the computation of total income were duly furnished by assessee and no deficiencies in furnishing of such facts were pointed out by the department, deeming fiction of Explanation 1 to se…