6 PCIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure 402 ITR 363 (Allahabad) 7 Gopal Lal Bhadruka v. DCIT

346 ITR 10Reported decision2012#20574 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 358,232 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2023.

Judgments citing 6 PCIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure 402 ITR 363 (Allahabad) 7 Gopal Lal Bhadruka v. DCIT

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Hes Infra Pvt Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 606/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…os.607 to 610/Hyd/2016 and others. 5. M/s. KNR Constructions Vs. DCIT, Central Circle – 3 – ITA No.946/Hyd/2015 and others. 6 PCIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure 402 ITR 363 (Allahabad) 7 Gopal Lal Bhadruka Vs. DCIT [2012] 27 taxmann.com 167 (Andhra Pradesh)/[2012] 346 ITR 10... 8 PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. Reported in [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) 9. The ld.AR had submitted that the decisions relied upon by the ld.DR are distinguishable on facts and law. It was submitted that though there are decisions of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and Rajasthan High Court against the assessee, however, there are decisi…

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Hes Infra Pvt Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 605/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…os.607 to 610/Hyd/2016 and others. 5. M/s. KNR Constructions Vs. DCIT, Central Circle – 3 – ITA No.946/Hyd/2015 and others. 6 PCIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure 402 ITR 363 (Allahabad) 7 Gopal Lal Bhadruka Vs. DCIT [2012] 27 taxmann.com 167 (Andhra Pradesh)/[2012] 346 ITR 10... 8 PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. Reported in [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) 9. The ld.AR had submitted that the decisions relied upon by the ld.DR are distinguishable on facts and law. It was submitted that though there are decisions of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and Rajasthan High Court against the assessee, however, there are decisi…

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Hes Infra Pvt Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 604/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…os.607 to 610/Hyd/2016 and others. 5. M/s. KNR Constructions Vs. DCIT, Central Circle – 3 – ITA No.946/Hyd/2015 and others. 6 PCIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure 402 ITR 363 (Allahabad) 7 Gopal Lal Bhadruka Vs. DCIT [2012] 27 taxmann.com 167 (Andhra Pradesh)/[2012] 346 ITR 10... 8 PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. Reported in [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) 9. The ld.AR had submitted that the decisions relied upon by the ld.DR are distinguishable on facts and law. It was submitted that though there are decisions of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and Rajasthan High Court against the assessee, however, there are decisi…

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Hes Infra Pvt Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 603/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…os.607 to 610/Hyd/2016 and others. 5. M/s. KNR Constructions Vs. DCIT, Central Circle – 3 – ITA No.946/Hyd/2015 and others. 6 PCIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure 402 ITR 363 (Allahabad) 7 Gopal Lal Bhadruka Vs. DCIT [2012] 27 taxmann.com 167 (Andhra Pradesh)/[2012] 346 ITR 10... 8 PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. Reported in [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) 9. The ld.AR had submitted that the decisions relied upon by the ld.DR are distinguishable on facts and law. It was submitted that though there are decisions of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and Rajasthan High Court against the assessee, however, there are decisi…