ACIT v. Ranbir Chemicals

114 ITD 121Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#22048 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 133A Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 147 Section 148 Section 148A Section 148A(d)

Judgments citing ACIT v. Ranbir Chemicals

Karimnagar Milk Producer Company Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Karimnagar

ITA 1388/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 270A

…s regard, reliance is placed on Supreme Court decision in the case of Calcutta Municipal Corporation vs. Pawan Kumar Saraf (1999) 1 SC 39. This case was referred to and considered by Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh in para 6.1 in the case of ACIT vs. Ranbir Chemicals 114 ITD 121. Relevant para 6.1 is reproduced below: "6.1 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Tata Yodogawa Ltd. 1988 (38) ELT 739 held that delay due to inter departmental correspondence and processing is not a sufficient cause for condonation of delay. Similarly in the case of Calcutta Municipal Corpn v. Pawan Kumar Saraf J.T. 1999 (1) S.C. 39 it w…

Nirmal Kumar Agrawal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle - 4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1224/JPR/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Feb 2025AY 2013-2014

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…s regard, reliance is placed on Supreme Court decision in the case of Calcutta Municipal Corporation vs. Pawan Kumar Saraf (1999) 1 SC 39. This case was referred to and considered by Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh in para 6.1 in the case of ACIT vs. Ranbir Chemicals 114 ITD 121. Relevant para. 6.1 is reproduced below: "6.1 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Tata Yodogawa Ltd. 1988 (38) ELT 739 held that delay due to inter departmental correspondence and processing is not a sufficient cause for condonation of delay. Similarly in the case of Calcutta Municipal Corpn v. Pawan Kumar Saraf J.T. 1999 (1) S.C. 39 it…

DCIT-11(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sangam India Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee‟s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1490/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.1490/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dcit-11(1)(2) M/S. Sangam India Ltd. Gf, Room No.1 306, „B‟ Wing बिाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dynasty Business Park Vs. Mumbai-400 020 J.B. Nagar, A.K. Road Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccs-0486-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & Co No.01/Mum/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Sangam India Ltd. Dcit-11(1)(2) 306, „B‟Wing Gf, Room No.1 बिाम/ Dynasty Business Park Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. J.B. Nagar, A.K. Road Mumbai-400 020 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccs-0486-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah-Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Ajit Kumar Shrivastava-Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/07/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 26/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Shrivastava-Ld

Section 2(24)

…dered on 28/02/2020. The Ld. AR pleaded that a liberal construction of the limitation provisions has to be adopted in order to advance substantial justice. Similar distinction has been sought in the decision of Chandigarh Tribunal in ACIT v. Ranbir Chemicals {114 ITD 121 (Chd)} as well as in the decision in CIT v. Grindlays Bank {208 ITR 700 (Cal.)}. In the case of J. B. Advani & Co. Ltd. v. CIT {72 ITR 395 (SC)}, the assessee did not explain the delay for part of the period. 5.6 While distinguishing all these decisions, Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in Anand Kumar Jain v. ITO {ITA…