Amit Arora v. ACIT

122 Taxmann.com 78Reported decision#11020 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 365,807 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 234A

Judgments citing Amit Arora v. ACIT

Kempapura Srinivasareddy Uday, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 755/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeykempapura Srinivasareddy Uday Dcit, Central Circle-2(2) Bengaluru 328, B Block Aces Layout Kundalahalli Vs. Bangalore 560037 Pan – Actpu3804H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Siddesh N. Gaddi, Ca Revenue By: Shri Satish M., Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.08.2024 O R D E R Per: Keshav Dubey, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N. Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satish M., CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 22Section 250Section 80C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE “B” BENCH, BANGALORE Before Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member and Shri Keshav Dubey, Judicial Member Kempapura Srinivasareddy Uday DCIT, Central Circle-2(2) Bengaluru 328, B Block Aces Layout Kundalahalli vs. Bangalore 560037 PAN – ACTPU3804H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Siddesh N. Gaddi, CA Revenue by: Shri Satish M., CIT-DR Date of hearing: 24.06.2024 Date of pronouncement: 28.08.2024 O R D E R Per: Keshav Dubey, J.M. This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against ld. CIT(A)’s Order vide DIN- ITBA/APL/M/250/2003-24/106170245…

ACIT Central Circle 2 (1) Investigation Wing, Chennai vs. M/S G Tech Stone Ltd, Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 583/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

ACIT Central Circle 2 (1) Investigation Wing, Chennai vs. M/S G Tech Stone Ltd, Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 582/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

ACIT Central Circle 2 (1) Investigation Wing, Chennai vs. M/S G Tech Stone Ltd, Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 581/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

ACIT Central Circle 2 (1) Investigation Wing, Chennai vs. M/S G Tech Stone Ltd, Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 580/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

G-Tech Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 539/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

G-Tech Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 538/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

G-Tech Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 537/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

G-Tech Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3053/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

…unwarranted in law as no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, this decision, in our opinion, has no application to the present case before us. 10. The Ld. DR has also referred to the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Amit Arora V/s ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78). We find that this case deal with a situation where the original return was filed by the assessee after the date of search only and no return was filed prior to the search. In this context, the bench held that when the assessee has filed original return after the date of search, the AO has the jurisdiction to make additions in the Assessm…

Amit Arora v. ACIT (122 Taxmann.com 78) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax