4 Gabriel India LTd. v. CIT

194 Taxmann.com 57High Court2010#23351 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Judgments citing 4 Gabriel India LTd. v. CIT

Exotic Realtors and Developers, Chandigarh vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 189/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263

…ly his mind. The proceeding in fact shows that the AO directed his mind specifically on this aspect and then concluded that the expenditure was in the revenue field. Reliance was placed on  Ashish Rajpal [2009] 320 ITR 674 (Del) 11  Vikash Polymers [ 2010] 194 Taxmann.com 57 (Del)  Krishna Cop Box (P) Ltd. (2015) 60 Taxmann.com 243 (All) The Ld. AR thus concluded that where the AO has made necessary enquiry and applied his mind, Commissioner or PCIT cannot exercise his revisional powers under section 263 of the Act. 13.9 The Ld. AR then contended that non passing of elaborate order does not tentamount to no…

Atul Kumar Anchalia, Jaora vs. PCIT-1, Indore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 63/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri B.M. Biyani (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Dafaria, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 263

…63/IND/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No Atul Kumar Anchalia. vs. PCIT Ltd. [2015] 60 taxmann.com 243, the Jurisdictional Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ratlam Coal Ash Co. [1987] 34 taxmann.com 443 and Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymers [2010] 194 Taxmann.com 57. 3.4. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the Ld. PCIT wrongly assumed that the land situated in “Jaora Municipality” and wrongly concluded it is not an agricultural land where as land situated in Gram Kumhari which is in Jaora Tahsil and not in Jaora Municipality. Further the Ld. PCIT has reproduced the reply filed by the assessee and not…

Parimal Chandrakant Zaveri, Mumbai vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 283/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2015-16 Parimal Chandrakant The Pr. Zaveri Commissioner of 5/9A, Dreamland Vs Income Tax-1, Building, Vadodara New Queen Road, Opera House, (Respondent) Mumbai 400004 Maharashtra PAN: AACPZ2367D (Appellant) Appellant by : Shri Piyush Chhajed, A.R. Respondent by : Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 26-09-2022 Date of pronouncement : 16-12-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the Assesse…