Aryadeep Complex (P) Ltd. v. Pr. CIT

219 TTJ 735Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2022#23681 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,627 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)(b)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 54BSection 54B(1)

Judgments citing Aryadeep Complex (P) Ltd. v. Pr. CIT

Renu Lata Bhatia, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per afore-stated terms

ITA 191/RPR/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.191/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Renu Lata Bhatia D-407/5, Tagore Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Ahhpb4779K

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)

…ircular No.20/2015 dated 29.12.2015, had traversed beyond his jurisdiction and made the impugned addition of Rs.50,65,900/- (supra). Our aforesaid view is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Raipur, in the case of Aryadeep Complex (P) Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT, (2022) 219 TTJ 735 (Raipur), wherein the Tribunal, based on its exhaustive deliberations and after considering the CBDT Instruction No.20 of 2015 dated 29.12.2015 and drawing support from the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Su-Raj Diamond Dealers (P) Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT (2020) 203 TTJ ( Mumbai) 137, had observed, that since the assessee’s case was selected fo…

Rahul Bajpai, Idgah Chowk vs. DCIT Circle 1(1), Shri Ram Plaza

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 345/RPR/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Jan 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.345/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Bajpai Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh-495 001 Pan: Aexpb4410L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54BSection 54DSection 56(2)(vii)

…ircular No.20/2015 dated 29.12.2015, had traversed beyond his jurisdiction and made the impugned addition of Rs.50,65,900/- (supra). Our aforesaid view is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Raipur, in the case of Aryadeep Complex (P) Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT, (2022) 219 TTJ 735 (Raipur), wherein the Tribunal, based on its exhaustive deliberations and after considering the CBDT Instruction No.20 of 2015 dated 29.12.2015 and drawing support from the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Su-Raj Diamond Dealers (P) Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT (2020) 203 TTJ ( Mumbai) 137, had observed, that since the assessee’s case was selected fo…

Tata Nyk Shipping Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. CIT International Taxation-3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1067/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tata Nyk Shipping Pte. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., International Taxation-3, 6, Shenton Way, #18-08B, New Delhi Oue Downtown 2, Singapore Pan :Aadct9945P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 263Section 92C

…inder Kumar Vs. PCIT, 187 ITD 454 (Del. Trib.) 5. Rajani Venkata Naga Annavarapu Vs. PCIT, ITA No.1817/Del/2020, dated 16.06.2021 (Del.- Trib.) 6. Gift Land Handicraft Vs. CIT, 108 TTJ 312 (Del.) 15 AY: 2016-17 7. Aryadeep Complex (P.) Ltd. Vs. PCIT, [2022] 219 TTJ 735 (Raipur) 8. CIT Vs. Software Consultants, 341 ITR 240 (Delhi) 9. Simbhaoli Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 78 ITD 161 (SB). 8. He submitted, the CIT has committed gross jurisdictional error in invoking powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of issues which are beyond the scope of limited scrutiny for which the assessment proceedings were init…

Aryadeep Complex (P) Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (219 TTJ 735) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax