How many judgments cite Ajantha Industries v. CBDT?

28 judgments on BharatTax cite Ajantha Industries v. CBDT (102 ITR 281), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Ajantha Industries v. CBDT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 127, Section 132, Section 1961, Section 142(1), Section 144, Section 271(1)(c).

Ajantha Industries v. CBDT

102 ITR 281Supreme Court of India1976#4116 most cited

What is Ajantha Industries v. CBDT authority for?

An order transferring a case is invalid if it is not communicated to the assessee. Non-communication of the transfer order is a serious infirmity.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Ajantha Industries v. CBDT · section 127 · transfer of case · non-communication · invalid order · assessing officer · jurisdiction · natural justice

Sections most often in play

Section 127 Section 132 Section 1961 Section 142(1)Section 144 Section 271(1)(c)Section 153C Section 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

section 127(1)section 124(1)section 124(3)(a)section 127(2)section 63 section 124(3)section 120 section 124 percentage completion method section 127 permanent account number eligible assessee

Judgments citing Ajantha Industries v. CBDT

Nishakar Educational Trust, Niali vs. ITO (Exemption), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 133/CTK/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2013-14 Nishakar Nishakar Educational Educational Trust, Trust, Vs. Ito (Exemptions), Ito (Exemptions), At:Village Podana, Po: Kapasi, At:Village Podana, Po: Kapasi, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Ps: Niali, Distl Cuttack Ps: Niali, Distl Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aabtn 2929 A (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Ar , Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 18 /5/ 20 / 2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18 /5 5/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A),1, Bhubaneswar Cit(A),1, Bhubaneswar In Appeal No.0450/16-17 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Shri K.K.Bal, Ld Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri K.K.Bal, Ld Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri K.K.Bal, Ld Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bal, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

Section 11Section 127(2)(a)Section 12ASection 143(2)

…e case by supressing and overriding the provisions of law and also violation of principles of natural justice. In support of my argument I am relying the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme court in the Ajantha Industries and others vs. Central Board of Direct taxes 102 ITR 281 (SC). Copy of the judgement has been place at page37 of the paper Book. (iv). In Deep Malhotra & others Vs. CIT & Others (2011) 334 ITR 232 (P&H) it has been held that before transferring any case from one Assessing officer to another Assessing officer not subordinate to the same Commissioner, the assesse is required to be given reasonable opport…

Jaswantlal J Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 512/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआअसं. 510/मुं/2018 ("न. व. 2009-10) आअसं. 511/मुं/2018 ("न. व.2010-11) आअसं. 512/मुं/2018 ("न. व. 2011-12) Mr Jaswantlal J Shah, 60, Bapu Khote, Cross Lane, Mumbai 400 003 Pan: Aadps 2464H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Aci, Central Circle -32, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : None ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Usha Gaikwad सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/02/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/05/2021 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad

Section 127

…ed and set aside. CASES RELIED UPON: 1. Rentwork India P. Ltd vs Pr.CIT-14 (Bom. HC ) Writ Petition No. (L) 1944 of 2017 decided on 11-10-2017 2. Noorul Islam Educational Trust vs. CIT-1 (2016) 388 ITR 489 3. Ajantha Industries and Ors. Vs CBDT and Ors (1976) 102 ITR 281 (SC)” 4. Ms. Usha Gaikwad representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. The ld. Departmental Representative strongly supporting the findings of CIT(A) in upholding jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in passing the assessment order pointed that the Assessing Officer’s juris…

Jaswantlal J Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 510/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad

Section 127

M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant, Kota vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 688/JPR/2019[0]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 688/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant Cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. Pan No.: Aaatw 0127 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) & 12Aa(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That In The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Pr. Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Has Grossly Erred In Cancelling The Registration Of The Assessee Appellant Trust Under Section 12A Of The Act By Invoking Section 12Aa(4) Of The Act W.E.F. 01/04/2013. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Amend Any Ground On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Ranka &For Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi (CIT-DR)

Section 12ASection 133ASection 271F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 688/JP/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/s Wholesale Cloth Merchant cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. PAN No.: AAATW 0127 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Ambrish Bedi (…

Smt. Sangeeta Mukesh Jain, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-12, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2400/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2400/Ahd/2011 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Lali P.Jain, Sr.DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 263Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2400/Ahd/2011 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06) Smt. Sangeeta Mukeshkumar The ITO बनाम/ Jain Ward-2(3) Vs. Prop. of EES JAE INC., Ahmedabad B-601, Anmol Tower Nr.Shahibaug Dafnala Shahibaug, Ahmedabad-380 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ABSPJ 8269 M .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Rajeev Kumar, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by: Shri Lali…

Raj Sheela Growth Fund (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 21(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 881/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: S/Shri Raj Kumar Gupta and SumitFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-D.R

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 224Section 56Section 56(2)(viia)Section 68

…ated in Sec. 127 (1) and (2) is dispensed with, other statutory formalities which include issuing an order are required to be complied with and in the absence of the same the Asstt. is to be treated as illegal. ii) AJANTHA INDUSTRIES AND ORS. VS. ABDT & ORS. 102 ITR 281 (SC) Held that - The requirement of recording reasons U/s. 127 (1) for transfer of a case from one AO to another is a mandatory direction and non - communication thereof to the assessee is not saved by showing that the reasons exist in the file although not communicated to the assessee. iii) RISHABH BUILDCON (P) LTD. VS. CIT & ORS. (2011) 57 DTR…

Income Tax Officer vs. M/S.Madeeha Enterprises

Appeals are allowed

WA/100006/2014HC Karnataka10 Aug 2015

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

Section 4

…contended that since no reasonable opportunity was granted before passing the order of transfer, the order was bad as being contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ajantha Industries and others vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes and others, (1976) 102 ITR 281 (SC) and also an unreported judgment of this Court of a learned judge of this Court in Writ Petition 14 No.33035/2011 and connected matters in M.B.Mallikarjuna vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax, Davangere, wherein it was interpreted that unless reasonable opportunity of meeting the proposal of transfer is granted to the assessee and…

M/S.Madeeha Enterprises vs. Income Tax Officer

WP/83055/2013HC Karnataka11 Nov 2013

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy Writ Petition No.83055/2013 (I-It) C/W W.P.Nos. 83056/2013, 83057/2013, 83058/2013, 83059/2013, 83060/2013 (T-It) Between: M/S.Madeeha Enterprises No.1622, Madeeha House, Khb Colony, J P Nagar, Hospet-583201 Rep.By Its Managing Partner, Mr. Meeran Abdul Aleem. ... Petitioner (Common In All Petitions) (By Sri. M V Seshachala, Advocate.) & 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bellary, Aayakar Bhavan, Staff Road, Fort, Bellary-583102. 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary, Aayakar Bhavan, Staff Road, Fort, Bellary-583102.

Section 127

…reasonable opportunity to the party to make his objections. The reasonable opportunity has been examined and dealt with by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajantha Industries and Others Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes and Others reported in (1976) 102 ITR 281 (SC); and another judgment of this Court in W.P.No.33035/2011 and connected matter dated 20.07.2012 in the case of M.B.Mallikarjuna Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax, Davanagere; and W.P.No.6452/2010 dated 17.04.2013 and submitted that the reasonable opportunity under Section 127(2) of the Act has been interpreted by this Court and held that the…