(a) Dr. T.A. Quereshi v. CIT

86 ITR 607Supreme Court of India1972#11860 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing (a) Dr. T.A. Quereshi v. CIT

M/S GOGGA GURUSANTHAIAH AND BROTHERS ,HOSPET vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3319/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…rds reclamation and rehabilitation of mining areas, as per direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ld.Counsel placed reliance on following decisions in support: (a) Dr. T.A. Quereshi vs. CIT (2006)(287 ITR 547)(SC) (b) CIT vs. S.N.A.S.A. Annamalai Chettiar (1972)(86 ITR 607)(SC) (c) CIT vs. S.C.Kothari (1971)(82 ITR 794)(SC) (d) CIT vs. Piara Singh (1980)(124 ITR 40)(SC) (e) CIT vs. T.C. Reddy (2013)(356 ITR 516)(AP) (f) RamachandarShivnarayan vs. CIT (1978)(111 ITR 263)(SC) (g) Bipinchand K Bhatia vs. DCIT (Tax appeal No.107 of 2004 dated 16.10.2014) (h) BadridasDaga vs. CIT (1958)(34 ITR 10)(SC) (i) Poona Electric…

M/S GOGGA GURUSANTHAIAH AND BROTHERS ,HOSPET vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3318/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…rds reclamation and rehabilitation of mining areas, as per direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ld.Counsel placed reliance on following decisions in support: (a) Dr. T.A. Quereshi vs. CIT (2006)(287 ITR 547)(SC) (b) CIT vs. S.N.A.S.A. Annamalai Chettiar (1972)(86 ITR 607)(SC) (c) CIT vs. S.C.Kothari (1971)(82 ITR 794)(SC) (d) CIT vs. Piara Singh (1980)(124 ITR 40)(SC) (e) CIT vs. T.C. Reddy (2013)(356 ITR 516)(AP) (f) RamachandarShivnarayan vs. CIT (1978)(111 ITR 263)(SC) (g) Bipinchand K Bhatia vs. DCIT (Tax appeal No.107 of 2004 dated 16.10.2014) (h) BadridasDaga vs. CIT (1958)(34 ITR 10)(SC) (i) Poona Electric…

M/S GOGGA GURUSANTHAIAH AND BROTHERS ,HOSPET vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3317/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…rds reclamation and rehabilitation of mining areas, as per direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ld.Counsel placed reliance on following decisions in support: (a) Dr. T.A. Quereshi vs. CIT (2006)(287 ITR 547)(SC) (b) CIT vs. S.N.A.S.A. Annamalai Chettiar (1972)(86 ITR 607)(SC) (c) CIT vs. S.C.Kothari (1971)(82 ITR 794)(SC) (d) CIT vs. Piara Singh (1980)(124 ITR 40)(SC) (e) CIT vs. T.C. Reddy (2013)(356 ITR 516)(AP) (f) RamachandarShivnarayan vs. CIT (1978)(111 ITR 263)(SC) (g) Bipinchand K Bhatia vs. DCIT (Tax appeal No.107 of 2004 dated 16.10.2014) (h) BadridasDaga vs. CIT (1958)(34 ITR 10)(SC) (i) Poona Electric…

SRI. B. RUDRAGOUDA,BELLARY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, BELLARY

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…lanation 1 to section 37 is applicable only for business expenditure and not for business loss. The said principle has been explained in the below mentioned decisions:- Dr. T.A. Qureshi v. CIT [2006 287 ITR 547 (SC) CIT v. S.N.A.S.A. Annamalai Chettiar [1972] 86 ITR 607 (SC) CIT v. S.C. Kothari [1971] 82 ITR 794 (SC) CIT v. Piara Singh [1980] 124 ITR 40 (SC) CIT v. T.C. Reddy [2013] 356 ITR 516 (AP) Ramachandar Shivanarayan v. CIT [1978] 111 ITR 263 (SC) Bipinchandra K. Bhatia v. DCIT, Tax Appeal No.107 of 2004 (Guj) 30. Though there is no specific provision providing for deduction of ‘business loss’ by virtue of…

SRI. B. RUDRAGOUDA,BELLARY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, BELLARY

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…lanation 1 to section 37 is applicable only for business expenditure and not for business loss. The said principle has been explained in the below mentioned decisions:- Dr. T.A. Qureshi v. CIT [2006 287 ITR 547 (SC) CIT v. S.N.A.S.A. Annamalai Chettiar [1972] 86 ITR 607 (SC) CIT v. S.C. Kothari [1971] 82 ITR 794 (SC) CIT v. Piara Singh [1980] 124 ITR 40 (SC) CIT v. T.C. Reddy [2013] 356 ITR 516 (AP) Ramachandar Shivanarayan v. CIT [1978] 111 ITR 263 (SC) Bipinchandra K. Bhatia v. DCIT, Tax Appeal No.107 of 2004 (Guj) 30. Though there is no specific provision providing for deduction of ‘business loss’ by virtue of…

M/S. VEERABHADRAPPA SANGAPPA & COMPANY,SANDUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, BELLARY

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1054/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013–14

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT
Section 145Section 28Section 5

…rds reclamation and rehabilitation of mining areas, as per direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ld.Counsel placed reliance on following decisions in support: (a) Dr. T.A. Quereshi vs. CIT (2006)(287 ITR 547)(SC) (b) CIT vs. S.N.A.S.A. Annamalai Chettiar (1972)(86 ITR 607)(SC) (c) CIT vs. S.C.Kothari (1971)(82 ITR 794)(SC) (d) CIT vs. Piara Singh (1980)(124 ITR 40)(SC) (e) CIT vs. T.C. Reddy (2013)(356 ITR 516)(AP) (f) RamachandarShivnarayan vs. CIT (1978)(111 ITR 263)(SC) (g) Bipinchand K Bhatia vs. DCIT (Tax appeal No.107 of 2004 dated 16.10.2014) (h) BadridasDaga vs. CIT (1958)(34 ITR 10)(SC) (i) Poona Electric…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VYAPTI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2688/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Nov 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri/Ms. Nupur Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri/Ms. Virendra Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 22

…section 30 to 43C, are allowable on commercial principles on computing profits provided the loss are of a revenue nature and they are not merely connected with the trade but are really incidental to the trade itself. CIT V. S.N.A.S.A. ArmamalaiChettiar (1972) 86 ITR 607 (SC). Here in course of money lending business of HUF certain properties were taken over in settlement of debts - On partition of HUF, assessee received some of those properties in Malaya and continued to carry on money-lending business. During war, assessee suffered damages to those properties on account of Japanese bombing and, claimed such loss…

VYAPTI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2120/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Nov 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri/Ms. Nupur Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri/Ms. Virendra Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 22

…section 30 to 43C, are allowable on commercial principles on computing profits provided the loss are of a revenue nature and they are not merely connected with the trade but are really incidental to the trade itself. CIT V. S.N.A.S.A. ArmamalaiChettiar (1972) 86 ITR 607 (SC). Here in course of money lending business of HUF certain properties were taken over in settlement of debts - On partition of HUF, assessee received some of those properties in Malaya and continued to carry on money-lending business. During war, assessee suffered damages to those properties on account of Japanese bombing and, claimed such loss…

DENIS EXPORTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the ITA No

ITA 1680/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Capt. Prasad S. Arya (Sr. DR)For Respondent: Shri Naresh Kumar (AR)
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1680/Mum/2011 for AY - 2006-07 Denis Exports Pvt. Ltd. ACIT Circle- 8(1), Unit No. 2 B, Unit No. 10, Aayakar Bhavan, Mittal Industrial Estate, Mumbai. Vs. Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059 PAN: AAACD5065H (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 989/Mum/2013 for AY - 2006-07 Denis Exports Pvt. Ltd. Jt.CIT (OSD) Range- 8(1), Unit No. 2 B, Unit No. 1, Mumbai. Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri Vs. (E), Mumbai-400059 PAN: AAACD5065H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by…

(a) Dr. T.A. Quereshi v. CIT (86 ITR 607) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax