3 ITR 186 (Del.) (HC) and Prem Brothers 4 I.T.A.Nos.708 & 1089/PUN./2023 Infrastructure LLP v. NFAC

334 CTR 363High Court2022#20547 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 270a(9)section 270asection 250nfac

Judgments citing 3 ITR 186 (Del.) (HC) and Prem Brothers 4 I.T.A.Nos.708 & 1089/PUN./2023 Infrastructure LLP v. NFAC

Shri Premprakashishprakash Sharma, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Nashik

ITA 19/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Pune20 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl.CIT
Section 147Section 249(2)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 274

…arely covered in favour of the assessee by the law laid down by Hon’ble ITAT, Pune in case of Kishor Digambar Patil v. ITO [ITA.Nos.54&55/PUNE/2023] rendered on identical facts, as well as Delhi High Court decision in case of Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP [334 CTR 363] and all the relevant facts are already available on record and therefore, it is prayed that the said issue may please be adjudicated by Hon’ble ITAT without remitting the matter back to CIT(A) in view of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Coca Cola India (P) Ltd. [368 ITR 487]. 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds,…

Shri Premprakashishprakash Sharma, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Wrd-2(1), Pune

ITA 18/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Pune20 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl.CIT
Section 147Section 249(2)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 274

…arely covered in favour of the assessee by the law laid down by Hon’ble ITAT, Pune in case of Kishor Digambar Patil v. ITO [ITA.Nos.54&55/PUNE/2023] rendered on identical facts, as well as Delhi High Court decision in case of Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP [334 CTR 363] and all the relevant facts are already available on record and therefore, it is prayed that the said issue may please be adjudicated by Hon’ble ITAT without remitting the matter back to CIT(A) in view of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Coca Cola India (P) Ltd. [368 ITR 487]. 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds,…

Shri Shivaji Dattatray Sonawane, Nashik vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Nashik

ITA 708/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, JCIT
Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

…IT [D.B. Civil Writ Petition no.5594/2023 – Rajasthan High Court dated 02.01.2014]; Schneider Electric South East Asia (HQ) PTE Ltd. vs. ACIT [2022] 443 ITR 186 (Del.) (HC) and Prem Brothers 4 I.T.A.Nos.708 & 1089/PUN./2023 Infrastructure LLP vs. NFAC [2022] 334 CTR 363 (Del.) (HC). We further wish to draw support from hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. DCIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bom.)(HC) (FB) that such a failure on Assessing Officer’s part in not specifying the relevant limb at the time of initiation of penalty itself vitiates the entire proceedings being in the nature of an…

Shri Shivaji Dattatray Sonawane, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Nashik

ITA 1089/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, JCIT
Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

…IT [D.B. Civil Writ Petition no.5594/2023 – Rajasthan High Court dated 02.01.2014]; Schneider Electric South East Asia (HQ) PTE Ltd. vs. ACIT [2022] 443 ITR 186 (Del.) (HC) and Prem Brothers 4 I.T.A.Nos.708 & 1089/PUN./2023 Infrastructure LLP vs. NFAC [2022] 334 CTR 363 (Del.) (HC). We further wish to draw support from hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. DCIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bom.)(HC) (FB) that such a failure on Assessing Officer’s part in not specifying the relevant limb at the time of initiation of penalty itself vitiates the entire proceedings being in the nature of an…