Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) 10.2CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry

197 ITR 350High Court1992#13671 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,627 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Judgments citing Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) 10.2CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry

Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 299/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ow ability of the claim of interest u/s 36(1)(iii). 10. Supporting case laws: 10.1CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) 10.2CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) 10.3 CIT vs. Associated Garments Makers (1992) 197 ITR 350 (Raj)/(1992) 64 Taxmann 215 ( RAJ HC)(DPB 47-48) It was held under: Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. “6. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions and have looked into the provisions of law. 7. X X X X X X A perusal of ss. 246 to 251 makes it clear that any questions arising out of the assessment orders in an ap…

Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 298/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ow ability of the claim of interest u/s 36(1)(iii). 10. Supporting case laws: 10.1CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) 10.2CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) 10.3 CIT vs. Associated Garments Makers (1992) 197 ITR 350 (Raj)/(1992) 64 Taxmann 215 ( RAJ HC)(DPB 47-48) It was held under: Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. “6. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions and have looked into the provisions of law. 7. X X X X X X A perusal of ss. 246 to 251 makes it clear that any questions arising out of the assessment orders in an ap…

Mdlr Estates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8215/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…ilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry 34 ITR 342 (Bom) 4. CIT vs Union Tyres 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) 5. CIT vs. Sardari Lai & Co. 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) 6. CIT vs Changanlal Kailas & Co. 19 Taxmann 536 (Mad) 7. CIT vs. Associated Garments Makers 197 ITR 350 (Rajasthan) 8. CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta) 9. CIT vs. BP Sherafuddin 399 ITR 524 (Kerela) 22. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that transactions entered into by two sister concerns cannot be a valid ground for addition :- 1. ITA No. 596/Kol/2011 M/s Pluto Finance (P) Ltd 2. ITA No. 1840/Mum/2005 Shri Jayesh…

Mdlr Builders P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8214/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…ilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry 34 ITR 342 (Bom) 4. CIT vs Union Tyres 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) 5. CIT vs. Sardari Lai & Co. 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) 6. CIT vs Changanlal Kailas & Co. 19 Taxmann 536 (Mad) 7. CIT vs. Associated Garments Makers 197 ITR 350 (Rajasthan) 8. CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta) 9. CIT vs. BP Sherafuddin 399 ITR 524 (Kerela) 22. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that transactions entered into by two sister concerns cannot be a valid ground for addition :- 1. ITA No. 596/Kol/2011 M/s Pluto Finance (P) Ltd 2. ITA No. 1840/Mum/2005 Shri Jayesh…

Shashikiran Shetty, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4019/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha () Shashi Kiran Shetty Vs Acit, Cent.Cir.44, Mumbai 5Th Floor, Aavashya House Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 098 Pan : Ameps5601B Appellant Respondednt

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 274

…relied upon various judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Sardarilal & Co (2001) 251 ITR 864 (Del) and the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Curt in the case of CIT vs Associated Garments Makers (1992) 197 ITR 350. 10. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting the order of the Ld.CIT(A) submitted that the document found during the course of search and enquiries conducted during post search enquiries clearly established the fact 15 ITA 4019/Mum/2014 that the assessee is in the habit of booking bogus expenditure in various companies in order to si…

Neeraj Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1490/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Adv, AshwaniFor Respondent: Shri S.S Rana CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

…64 AAC was not therefore, competent to enhance the assessment taking this income which was not considered by the ITO at all.”—CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) : TC7R.576 applied. [paras 7 & 8]  CIT Vs. Associated Garment Makers (1992) 197 ITR 350 (Raj): The Hon‟ble Rajasthan High Court held as under: “A perusal of ss. 246 to 251 makes it clear that wide powers are given to the appellate authority, but these powers are circumscribed to the assessment order in the matters arising therefrom or a matter arising out of the proceedings; even the appellate authority can suo motu consider the qu…

Neeraj Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1488/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Adv, AshwaniFor Respondent: Shri S.S Rana CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

…64 AAC was not therefore, competent to enhance the assessment taking this income which was not considered by the ITO at all.”—CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) : TC7R.576 applied. [paras 7 & 8]  CIT Vs. Associated Garment Makers (1992) 197 ITR 350 (Raj): The Hon‟ble Rajasthan High Court held as under: “A perusal of ss. 246 to 251 makes it clear that wide powers are given to the appellate authority, but these powers are circumscribed to the assessment order in the matters arising therefrom or a matter arising out of the proceedings; even the appellate authority can suo motu consider the qu…

Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) 10.2CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (197 ITR 350) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax