Agricultural Produce Market Committee Narela v. CIT

305 ITR 1High Court1998#14030 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2019.

Judgments citing Agricultural Produce Market Committee Narela v. CIT

RAJESH VISWANATHAN,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT 35(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3675/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. Vallabhadas D. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. D.G. Pansari, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(5)Section 44ASection 68

…out of withdrawals. 5. Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submits that the CIT(A) should have admitted the additional evidence and decided the appeal. In this regard, reliance is placed by him on the decision in Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah v. CIT (1998) 305 ITR 1 (Bom) and the order of the Tribunal in Mr. Rajbahadur B. Yadav v. ITO (ITA No. 4000/Mum/2016 for AY 2011-12). Also reliance is placed by him on the decision in CIT v. Dr. Kodela Siva Prasad Rao 212 Taxman 147 (AP). The Ld. counsel further submits that documents viz. (i) sales register, (ii) sales ledger (iii) monthly cash summary (iv) cash book (v…

M/S HIMUDA,SHIMLA vs. ACIT, SHIMLA

The appeals are hereby dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 971/CHANDI/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Sinha

Section 10Section 263Section 3(31)

…proval and regulating of buildings and development activities through legislative intent by the assessee. Ground No 5) That Ld CIT has misconstrued the provisions of Section 10(20A) and ratio of the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee Narela vs CIT 305 ITR 1 is not applicable in this case. Ground No 6) That the Ld CIT has misconstrued the provisions of Section 3(31) of the General Clauses Act 1981 as laid down in the judgment of Union of India vs RC Jain 1981 (2) SCC 308. The assessee has power to raise funds and is statutory provided to levy fees and charges and are also providing water services and…

M/S HIMUDA,SHIMLA vs. ACIT, SHIMLA

The appeals are hereby dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 482/CHANDI/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Sinha

Section 10Section 263Section 3(31)

ITO 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL; BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 910/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.8581/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Deputy Commissioner Of Central Bank Of India Income Tax 2(1) Central Office बनाम/ Central Accounts Deptt. Aaykar Bhavan Vs. Chandermukhi, 4Th Floor Room No. 575, 5Th Floor Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-2498-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No. 153/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.8581/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Central Bank Of India Deputy Commissioner Of Central Office Income Tax 2(1) बनाम/ Central Accounts Deptt. Aaykar Bhavan Chandermukhi, 4Th Floor Room No. 575, 5Th Floor Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-2498-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

…u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 on 31/10/2006 at Rs.457.12 crores. The assessee contested the imposition of interest u/s 234D for Rs.8,01,64,223/- before first appellate authority by placing reliance on the decision of ITO Vs. Ekta Promoters Private Limited [305 ITR 1 SB DELHI] on the premises that interest u/s. 234D could be charged only after AY 2003-04 and not for any earlier years. The Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the same, against which the revenue is in further appeal before us. 7. The Ld. DR drew our attention to Page Nos. 91 & 92 and contended that the interest u/s 234D has been charged only in regular assessm…

CIT vs. EXPO GLOBE INDIA LTD

ITA/1257/2011HC Delhi20 Jul 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 147

…ITA-1257/2011 Page 1 $~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON: 20.07.2012 + ITA 1257/2011 CIT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Puneet Gupta, Jr. Standing Counsel. versus EXPO GLOBE INDIA LTD ..... Respondent Through: Dr. Rakesh Gupta with Ms. Rani Kiyala and Mr. Piyush Singh, Advocates. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The Revenue is aggrieved by an order of the I…

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

In the result, for the conclusions on the points urged

ITTA/500/2011HC Telangana12 Apr 2012

Bench: V.ESWARAIAH,K.G.SHANKAR

Section 10Section 260

…HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR I.T.T.A.No.500 of 2011 Date: 12-4-2012 Between Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur … Petitioner and Agricultural Market Committee, Duggirala … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR I.T.T.A.No.500 of 2011 Judgment: (per V.Eswaraiah, J.) Heard Sri S.R.Ashok, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the petitioner/Income Tax and Smt. K.Lalitha, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Agricultural Market Committee. 2. This is an appeal filed under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Ac…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/483/2011HC Telangana08 Feb 2012

Section 10

…HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKUR AND HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A.No.483 of 2011 Date: 08-02-2012 Between Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajahmundry … Petitioner and Agricultural Market Committee, Yanam … Respondent HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKUR AND HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR…