263 CTR 612 (All) Zafa Ahmad and Co. v. CIT

282 CTR 200High Court2016#20292 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,254 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 115bbsection 115bsection 115bbesection 115section 68section 11section 143section 14section 143(3)businessdocumentinterest

Judgments citing 263 CTR 612 (All) Zafa Ahmad and Co. v. CIT

M/S Satwant Agro Engineers, Bhawanigarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

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

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…of tax on said eflry. The following decided cases clearly indicate the said provision of law." 1) 263 CTR 612- Credit in partners account should not be assessed in firm. 2) 23 Income Tax Matter 37 - Partner's unexplained amount cannot be assessed in firm. 3) 282 CTR 200- Partner's capital cannot be assessed in firm. 4) Supreme Court of India held in CIT Vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd (2009) 319 ITR (ST) 5 that, "if the share application money is received by assessee company for alleged bogus shareholder, whose names are given to Assessing Officer, then the department is free to proceed to reopen their individual asse…

V.L Jewellers, Delhi vs. Circle-49(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 836/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.836/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम V.L. Jewellers, Pr. Commissioner Of 2775, 1St Floor, Gali No. 20-21, Vs. Income Tax, Beadon Pura, Karol Bagh, Circle 49(1), New Delhi. Room No. 1202, 12, Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadfv7989A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…viii) 141 UR 706 (All) CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance ix) 218 ITR 508 (All) India Rice Mills v. CIT x) 221 ITR 239 (All) Surendra Mahan Seth v. CIT xi) 263 CTR 612 (All) Zafa Ahmad and Co. v. CIT xii) 268 ITR 381 (Pat) CIT v. Md. Perwez Ahmad and Others xiii) 282 CTR 200 (Pat) CIT v. Anurag Rice Mills xiv) 268 ITR 381 (Pat) CIT v. Md. Parwez Ahmad 30 I.T.A.No.836/Del/2022 xv) 400 ITR 120 (Jhar.) Prayag Tendu Leaves Processing Co. v. CIT xvi) 291 ITR 232 (Mad.) CIT v. Taj Borewells xvii) ITA No. 2912/D/2014 dated 20.12.2017 Shri Gems v. ITO xviii) ITA No. 3734/D/2018 dated 29.3.2019 AMS Roadlines vs. DCIT It is…

ACIT Central-2, Indore vs. M/S Mayur Industries, Fatepur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 212/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniit(Ss)A No.212/Ind/2021 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Vs. Acit, Central-2, M/S. Mayur Industries, Indore Khandwa "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abefm 4664 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri P. K. Mishra, Cit.D.R. Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Assessee By : 19.12.2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 15.03.2023 O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.08.2021 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Bhopal (M.P.) (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Order Dated 30.12.2019 Passed By The Dcit (Central)-2, Indore (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘A.Y.’) 2018-19 With The Following Ground:

For Appellant: 19.12.2022For Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT.D.R
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…capital in the firm, the impugned amount could have been added in the hands of the partners but not in the hands of the assessee-firm. He relied upon the following judicial precedents in support of his contentions: (i) CIT-I, Patna v. Anurag Rice Mills [2016] 282 CTR 200 (Patna) (ii) Laxmi Imaging & Medical Research v. ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur [2012] 150 TTJ 44 (Jodhpur - Trib.)(UO) (iii) Sarjan Corporation v. ACIT [2012] 25 taxmann.com 426 (Ahmedabad - Trib.) (iv) M/s Jaylaxmi Land Developers Vs. ITO, Ward 1, Anand [ITA No. 2226/AHD/2016] 11. Accordingly, the Ld. Counsel contended that there was no justification…

Champ Info Software, Noida vs. Prcit, Noida

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2799/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2013-14 Champ Info Software, Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, E-24, Sector-55, A2, D Block, Sector 24, Noida. Noida (U.P.)-201301 Vs

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, C.I.T. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

…viii) 141 ITR 706 (All) CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance ix) 218 ITR 508 (All) India Rice Mills v. CIT x) 221 ITR 239 (All) Surendra Mahan Seth v. CIT xi) 263 CTR 612 (All) Zafa Ahmad and Co. v. CIT xii) 268 ITR 381 (Pat) CIT v. Md. Perwez Ahmad and Others xiii) 282 CTR 200 (Pat) CIT v. Anurag Rice Mills xiv) 268 ITR 381(Pat) CIT v. Md. Parwez Ahmad xv) 400 ITR 120 (Jhar.) Prayag Tendu Leaves Processing Co. v. CIT xvi) 291 ITR 232 (Mad.) CIT v. Taj Borewells xvii) ITA No. 2912/D/2014 dated 20.12.2017 Shri Gems v. ITO xviii) ITA No. 3734/D/2018 dated 29.3.2019 AMS Roadlines v. DCIT 3.1 It was also submitted by the L…

263 CTR 612 (All) Zafa Ahmad and Co. v. CIT (282 CTR 200) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax