Almac Corporation v. DCIT

60 Taxmann.com 34Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#25498 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 154(3)Section 154(7)Section 250Section 40(b)

Judgments citing Almac Corporation v. DCIT

KSHIPRA ENTERPROISES,MUMBAI vs. ITO 23(2)(6), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4717/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 154(3)Section 154(7)Section 250Section 40

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.4717/Mum/2025 A.Y: 2009-10 Kshipra Enterprises Vs ITO, Ward 23(2)(6) 257 / 259, BB Bhavan Piramal Chamber 2nd Floor, Kalbadevi Mumbai. HO, Mumbai - 400002 PAN – AAAFK4817B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Piyush Chhajed (Virtually) Revenue by Shri Pushkaraj Bhangepatil, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 04.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 25.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 01.05.2025 passed under secti…

KAMAL JEWELLERS,DEHRADUN vs. ADDL. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1154/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. P.K. Mishra, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rishpal Bedi, Sr. DR
Section 268A

…antee to be provided to the Bank, hence, the income derived from these FDRs should be treated as the business income and not the income from other sources. He has also relied upon the decision of Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Almac Corporation v. DCIT (2015) 60 Taxmann.com 34 (Ahd-Trib). 10. Having considered the rival submissions, we find that the issue in dispute is covered by the decision of ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in Almac Corporation (supra), wherein the Tribunal has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Md. Serajuddin & Bros. vs. CIT (2012) 24 taxmann.com 46 observing as under: “The said…

ACIT, DEHRADUN vs. KAMAL JEWELLERS, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1128/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. P.K. Mishra, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rishpal Bedi, Sr. DR
Section 268A

…antee to be provided to the Bank, hence, the income derived from these FDRs should be treated as the business income and not the income from other sources. He has also relied upon the decision of Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Almac Corporation v. DCIT (2015) 60 Taxmann.com 34 (Ahd-Trib). 10. Having considered the rival submissions, we find that the issue in dispute is covered by the decision of ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in Almac Corporation (supra), wherein the Tribunal has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Md. Serajuddin & Bros. vs. CIT (2012) 24 taxmann.com 46 observing as under: “The said…

Almac Corporation v. DCIT (60 Taxmann.com 34) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax