372 ITR 429 (Bombay HC) v. The Hon’ble Madras High Court

240 ITR 402High Court1999#20046 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 344,197 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 245c(1)section 23(4)section 142(3)section 4(1)section 193section 196section 245csection 127(2)section 271aaasettlement applicationsection 245d(4)section 124(3)

Judgments citing 372 ITR 429 (Bombay HC) v. The Hon’ble Madras High Court

Om Prakash Jakhotia, Telangna vs. ACIT, CC-26, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 971/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 292C

…ourt in the case of Murugesa Naicker Mansion [1999] 104 Taxman 563 (Madras HC); iv. The Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT v SMSL-UANRCL (JV) [2015] 372 ITR 429 (Bombay HC); v. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Abdul Rasheed [1999] 240 ITR 402 (Madras HC); vi. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Neela Productions [1997] 223 ITR 504 (Kerala HC); vii. The Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of B.D. Gupta & Sons v. ITO [2015] 70 SOT 16 (DELHI Trib.); 56 The ld. CIT-DR objected to the contentions raised by the ld. AR by stating that this legal issue i.e. the seized documents do not be…

Om Prakash Jakhotia, Telangna vs. ACIT, CC-26, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 970/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 292C

…ourt in the case of Murugesa Naicker Mansion [1999] 104 Taxman 563 (Madras HC); iv. The Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT v SMSL-UANRCL (JV) [2015] 372 ITR 429 (Bombay HC); v. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Abdul Rasheed [1999] 240 ITR 402 (Madras HC); vi. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Neela Productions [1997] 223 ITR 504 (Kerala HC); vii. The Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of B.D. Gupta & Sons v. ITO [2015] 70 SOT 16 (DELHI Trib.); 56 The ld. CIT-DR objected to the contentions raised by the ld. AR by stating that this legal issue i.e. the seized documents do not be…

Om Prakash Jakhotia, Telangna vs. ACIT, CC-26, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 969/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 292C

…ourt in the case of Murugesa Naicker Mansion [1999] 104 Taxman 563 (Madras HC); iv. The Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT v SMSL-UANRCL (JV) [2015] 372 ITR 429 (Bombay HC); v. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Abdul Rasheed [1999] 240 ITR 402 (Madras HC); vi. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Neela Productions [1997] 223 ITR 504 (Kerala HC); vii. The Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of B.D. Gupta & Sons v. ITO [2015] 70 SOT 16 (DELHI Trib.); 56 The ld. CIT-DR objected to the contentions raised by the ld. AR by stating that this legal issue i.e. the seized documents do not be…

Om Prakash Jakhotia, Telangna vs. ACIT, CC-26, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 968/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 292C

…ourt in the case of Murugesa Naicker Mansion [1999] 104 Taxman 563 (Madras HC); iv. The Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT v SMSL-UANRCL (JV) [2015] 372 ITR 429 (Bombay HC); v. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Abdul Rasheed [1999] 240 ITR 402 (Madras HC); vi. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Neela Productions [1997] 223 ITR 504 (Kerala HC); vii. The Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of B.D. Gupta & Sons v. ITO [2015] 70 SOT 16 (DELHI Trib.); 56 The ld. CIT-DR objected to the contentions raised by the ld. AR by stating that this legal issue i.e. the seized documents do not be…

372 ITR 429 (Bombay HC) v. The Hon’ble Madras High Court (240 ITR 402) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax