Abdulgafar A Nadiadwala v. ACIT

267 ITR 488High Court2004#11433 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2024.

Judgments citing Abdulgafar A Nadiadwala v. ACIT

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 299/PAT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri AK Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 801ASection 80I

…the General Clauses Act. Thus, the appellant has borrowed the meaning of these words from the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary. The appellant has referred to the judgement of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala vs/ ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 488 (Bom.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court was looking into the meaning of the words goods and merchandise, which are not defined under section 80HHC in the context of Income Tax Act, 1961. The Hon'ble High Court held that : 'it is well-settled that in the absence of there being anything contrary to the context, the language of a statute should be int…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 298/PAT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri AK Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 801ASection 80I

…the General Clauses Act. Thus, the appellant has borrowed the meaning of these words from the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary. The appellant has referred to the judgement of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala vs/ ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 488 (Bom.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court was looking into the meaning of the words goods and merchandise, which are not defined under section 80HHC in the context of Income Tax Act, 1961. The Hon'ble High Court held that : 'it is well-settled that in the absence of there being anything contrary to the context, the language of a statute should be int…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 297/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri AK Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 801ASection 80I

…the General Clauses Act. Thus, the appellant has borrowed the meaning of these words from the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary. The appellant has referred to the judgement of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala vs/ ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 488 (Bom.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court was looking into the meaning of the words goods and merchandise, which are not defined under section 80HHC in the context of Income Tax Act, 1961. The Hon'ble High Court held that : 'it is well-settled that in the absence of there being anything contrary to the context, the language of a statute should be int…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 294/PAT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri AK Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 801ASection 80I

…the General Clauses Act. Thus, the appellant has borrowed the meaning of these words from the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary. The appellant has referred to the judgement of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala vs/ ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 488 (Bom.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court was looking into the meaning of the words goods and merchandise, which are not defined under section 80HHC in the context of Income Tax Act, 1961. The Hon'ble High Court held that : 'it is well-settled that in the absence of there being anything contrary to the context, the language of a statute should be int…

SMT. SEFALI SARKAR,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 17, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2464/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 263Section 273ASection 37(1)

…n or timely relation amongst the twin reasons each contained in the CIT’s sec. 263 show cause notice on first round remand directions with the ones raised in latter round (supra). Hon'ble Bombay high court’s decision in Abdulgafar A Nadiadwala vs. ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 488/137 Taxman 112 (Bom) holds that it is very much permissible to adopt ordinary discretionary meaning in absence of any statutory guideline as follows:- “With the aforesaid strongly canvassed rival views, one has to find the answer to the question raised under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The provisions of the said Act do not define the wo…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SHREE BALAJI COMMUNICATIONS, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 36/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 36/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Shree Balaji Communications, Income Tax, Vs. No. 18/126, Dhan Enclave, Non-Corporate Circle 20, Bhajani Kovil St., Choolaimedu, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 094. [Pan:Abifs0605A]] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. M.M. Bhusari, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M.P. Senthil Kumar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.04.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.07.2016 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Iv, Chennai, Dated 16.10.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. In This Appeal, The Only Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue Is With Regard To Deletion Of Addition Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Towards

For Appellant: Dr. M.M. Bhusari, CITFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Senthil Kumar, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 19Section 194CSection 194JSection 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ilm rights as goods and sold it as goods without using any rights. Hence the question of royalty under section 9(1)(vi) read with section 194J of the Act does not arise. The AR of the also relied on the decision in the case of Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala v. ACIT 267 ITR 488 4 I.T.A. No.36/M/15 and submitted that the purchase of film right is neither covered under section 194J nor under section 194C of the Act. The ld. AR claimed that to safeguard the interest of the assessee, TDS under section 194C of the Act was deducted on the above said purchase cost. The Assessing Officer has not convinced with the submissions…

VISHWANATH ACHARAYA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 11(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7976/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7976/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08)

For Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…counting for different sources of income is following hybrid system of accounting which is not permitted by law as per the amended provisions of Section 145 of the Act. The assessee relied upon the judgment in the case of Abdulgafar A Nadiadwala v. ACIT (2004)267 ITR 488 (Bom. HC). The assessee submitted ITA 7976/M/11 27 that as per section 28 of the Act, the assessee has followed Rule 9A & 9B of Income Tax Rules,1962 to compute the income chargeable under the head “profits and gains from business or profession” in accordance with section 28. The assessee submitted that the A.O. has brought to tax in the impug…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/1223/2011HC Delhi20 Nov 2011
Section 10ASection 260A

…g 'bring in' or 'take out of or away from' and it was also held that goods in transit are also covered by the words 'imported into'or 'exported from'.” 21. In the case of Abdulgafar A. Nadiawala Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Other[2004] 267 ITR 488 (Bom) with reference to Section 80HHC of the Act, it has been held as under:- 2011:DHC:5847-DB ITA 1223/2011, 67/2010 and 458/2010 Page 19 “The phrase' export out of India' has been defined in cl. (aa) in Explanation-s. (4A). The apex Court has considered this clause in the case of CIT vs. Silver Art Palace: 2003 (259) ITR 684(SC), wh…

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX-IV, TAMIL NADU vs. B.SURESH

C.A. No.-003300-003300 - 2007Supreme Court03 Mar 2009
Section 80H

…on of the AO was over-ruled by CIT(A). When the matter came before the Tribunal at the instance of the Department, there was already a judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala Vs. Asst. Commr. of Income Tax & Ors., reported in 267 ITR 488 Bom. Following the said decision, in the present case, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to deduction under Section 80HHC, hence, this Civil Appeal by the Department. Contentions: On behalf of the Revenue, Shri V. Shekhar, learned senior counsel, submitted that the assessee in this case was not engaged in the export of g…

Abdulgafar A Nadiadwala v. ACIT (267 ITR 488) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax