315/216 Taxman 226 (Raj.), CST v. Girja Shanker Awanish Kumar

11 SCC 648Reported decision1996#16465 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 144BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 37Section 115BBESection 132Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

section 260section 260asection 30mercantile system of accountingcommercial expediencyprofits and gains of business or professionsection 145(3)section 145capital expendituresection 37(1)income-tax officerfirst appeal

Judgments citing 315/216 Taxman 226 (Raj.), CST v. Girja Shanker Awanish Kumar

Radhakishan Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 695/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

…me- tax Appellate Tribunal." 17. That other judgments on the above aspect are in the case of CIT v. Dr. A. P. Bahal [2010] 322 ITR 71 (Raj.)), CIT v. Jaimal Ram Kasturi [2013] 33 taxmann.com 315/216 Taxman 226 (Raj.), CST v. Girja Shanker Awanish Kumar [1996] 11 SCC 648; CIT v. Jas Jack Elegence Exports [2010] 324 ITR 95/191 Taxman 386 (Delhi), Arya Confectionery Works v. CIT [1983] 143 ITR 814 (M.P.) and Awadhesh Pratap Singh Abdul Rehman and Bros. v. CIT [1994] 210 ITR 406/76 Taxman 106 (All.). 18. This court in the case of CIT v. Inani Marbles (P.) Ltd. [2009] 316 ITR 125/[2008] 175 Taxman 56 (Raj.) and also t…

Radhakishna Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 694/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

…me- tax Appellate Tribunal." 17. That other judgments on the above aspect are in the case of CIT v. Dr. A. P. Bahal [2010] 322 ITR 71 (Raj.)), CIT v. Jaimal Ram Kasturi [2013] 33 taxmann.com 315/216 Taxman 226 (Raj.), CST v. Girja Shanker Awanish Kumar [1996] 11 SCC 648; CIT v. Jas Jack Elegence Exports [2010] 324 ITR 95/191 Taxman 386 (Delhi), Arya Confectionery Works v. CIT [1983] 143 ITR 814 (M.P.) and Awadhesh Pratap Singh Abdul Rehman and Bros. v. CIT [1994] 210 ITR 406/76 Taxman 106 (All.). 18. This court in the case of CIT v. Inani Marbles (P.) Ltd. [2009] 316 ITR 125/[2008] 175 Taxman 56 (Raj.) and also t…

M/S Kanak Vrindavan Resorts Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 543/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 37

…me- tax Appellate Tribunal." 17. That other judgments on the above aspect are in the case of CIT v. Dr. A. P. Bahal [2010] 322 ITR 71 (Raj.)), CIT v. Jaimal Ram Kasturi [2013] 33 taxmann.com 315/216 Taxman 226 (Raj.), CST v. Girja Shanker Awanish Kumar [1996] 11 SCC 648; CIT v. Jas Jack Elegence Exports [2010] 324 ITR 95/191 Taxman 386 (Delhi), Arya Confectionery Works v. CIT [1983] 143 ITR 814 (M.P.) and Awadhesh Pratap Singh Abdul Rehman and Bros. v. CIT [1994] 210 ITR 406/76 Taxman 106 (All.). 18. This court in the case of CIT v. Inani Marbles (P.) Ltd. [2009] 316 ITR 125/[2008] 175 Taxman 56 (Raj.) and also t…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3, Delhi vs. Alchemist Capital Ltd

ITA/251/2023HC Delhi03 May 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 212(6)Section 439Section 439(2)

…n Office21: to assert that the only co-accused who was also in custody, has already been admitted to regular bail. 16 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 13099 at para 15 17 (2012) 1 SCC 14 at paras 21-23 18 (2020) 11 SCC 648 at para 7 19 (2020) 13 SCC 337 at para 32 20 (2004) 2 SCC 362 at para 12 21 2023 SCC OnLine Del 276 at paras 45-47, 55, 59, 62 Digitally Signed By:NEERAJ Signing Date:03.05.2023 10:52:00 Signature Not Verified 2023:DHC:2994 BAIL APPLN. 251/2023…

Sri. M.V.Subba Rao S/O Rattayya and Anr vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Anr

WA/50311/2013HC Karnataka30 Oct 2013

Bench: RAM MOHAN REDDY,K.N.KESHAVANARAYANA

Section 18(1)Section 4Section 4(1)

…of preliminary notification for acquisition under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act observed thus: 2 (2011) 11 SCC 648 3 (2007) 9 SCC 650 - - WA Nos.50311-50312/2013 6 “20. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, although the proper course for us would have to remand the matter back to the Collector to determine the amount of compensation to which the Appellants would be…

315/216 Taxman 226 (Raj.), CST v. Girja Shanker Awanish Kumar (11 SCC 648) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax