Bikram Singh v. DCIT

82 Taxmann.com 230High Court2017#10236 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2021.

Also reported as

48 ITR 689

Judgments citing Bikram Singh v. DCIT

M/S TRIMURTY BUILDCON PVT.LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD, 2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/JPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 46/Jp/2021 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Cuke I.T.O. Vs. 601, Geeta Enclave, Vinoba Ward 2(2) Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabct 7285 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Miss. Shivangi Samdhani (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 17/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 25/03/2021 For The A.Y. 2013-14 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Id. Cit(A), Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of Assessee Company For The Sole Reason Of The Appeal Having Been Filed With Delay. The Action Of Id. Cit (A) Is Illegal, Unjustified, Arbitrary & Against The Facts Of The Case. Relief May Please Be Granted By Setting Aside The Order Of Id. Cit (A). 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Id. Cit(A), Has Erred In Coming To The Conclusion That The Appeal Of The 2

For Appellant: Miss. Shivangi Samdhani (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…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. 46/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/s Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., cuke I.T.O. Vs. 601, Geeta Enclave, Vinoba Ward 2(2) Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCT 7285 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Miss. Shivangi Samdhani (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue…

M/S GINNI GOLDLIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 673/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…5 (Del.)(FB) ii. CIT vs Union Tyers 107 Taxman 447 (Del) iii. CIT vs Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry 44 ITR 891 (SC) iv. CIT vs Rai Bahadur Hardutrey Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 (SC) v. CIT, Thrissur vs. B.P. Sharafudin 252 Taxman 326 (Ker) vi. Bikran Singh vs DCIT 82 Taxmann.com 230(Del.) vii. Ram Infrastructure Ltd. Vs JCIT, Jalgaon, 10 18. The learned DR, on the other hand, heavily relied on the order of the learned CIT(A). 19. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of Assessing Officer and learned CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also co…

M/S TRIMURTY BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1194/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1194/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Cuke I.T.O. Vs. 601, Geeta Enclave, Vinobha Ward 2(2) Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabct 7285 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Rohan Sogani (Ca) & Shri Rajeev Sogani (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 23/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/04/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- I, Jaipur Dated 13/09/2018 For The A.Y. 2013-14 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. (A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Enhancing The Income By Disallowing Interest Expenditure Of Rs. 53,78,282. The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Illegal, Unjustified, Arbitrary & Against The Facts Of The Case. Relief May Please Be Granted By Allowing The Said Expenditure Of Rs. 53,78,282. (B) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Exercising The Powers Of Enhancement Under Section 251(1)(A).

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, 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. 1194/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/s Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., cuke I.T.O. Vs. 601, Geeta Enclave, Vinobha Ward 2(2) Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCT 7285 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rohan Sogani (CA) & Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) jk…

SARAVJIT BHATIA,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), FARIDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7155/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anil Chaturvedi(Through Video Conference) A.Y. : 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 32Section 68Section 72

…ITA NO.7155/DEL/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-I’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) A.Y. : 2016-17 SARAVJIT BHATIA, Vs. ITO, WARD 2(3), A-362, DABUA COLONY, FARIDABAD PALI ROAD, FARIDABAD (PAN: AKMPB4292K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Rakesh Jain, Adv. Department by Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the impugned order dated 28.06.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad in relation to assessment year 2016-17…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R
Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

…bility of income from a new source, which was not considered by the AO. In support of this submission, he placed reliance on the following other decisions: 1. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, 44 ITR 891 (SC) 2. Sardarilal & co., 251 ITR 364 (Delhi) 3. Bikram singh, 48 ITR 689 4. Hari Mohan Sharma in ITA No. 2953/Del/2018 5. B.P. Sheraffudin, 23 SOT 227 (2008) 17.1 Further, he also submitted that CIT(A) cannot enhance an assessment unless the assessee has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. He submitted that no enhancement notice was given to the assessee and therefore, the enhanced income cannot be sust…

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2335/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R
Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

…bility of income from a new source, which was not considered by the AO. In support of this submission, he placed reliance on the following other decisions: 1. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, 44 ITR 891 (SC) 2. Sardarilal & co., 251 ITR 364 (Delhi) 3. Bikram singh, 48 ITR 689 4. Hari Mohan Sharma in ITA No. 2953/Del/2018 5. B.P. Sheraffudin, 23 SOT 227 (2008) 17.1 Further, he also submitted that CIT(A) cannot enhance an assessment unless the assessee has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. He submitted that no enhancement notice was given to the assessee and therefore, the enhanced income cannot be sust…

INDO OFFICE SOLUTIONS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 3176/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

Section 132Section 133Section 147Section 148

…Ramesh Kumar Pabbi vs. ACIT (ITA No. 5594/Del/2014). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Sardari Lal and Co. 251 ITR 864 as well as the decision of the Tribunal in case of Bikram Singh vs. DCIT (2016) 48 ITR 689. Thus, in light of the above, the Ld. AR submitted that the enhancement made by the CIT (A) is untenable in law. 7. As regards to Ground Nos. 4 and 5 relating to non-disposal of objection against re-opening of reassessment proceedings raised by the assessee by way of speaking order and non-application of independent mind by the Assessing Officer…

M/S PATIDAR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE,UJJAIN vs. THE ITO 2(1), UJJAIN

In the result, ITA No.1007/Ind/2016 is partly allowed, is allowed and ITA

ITA 1541/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 40Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCHE, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1007, 1008 & 1541/Ind/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11,2012-13&2010-11 M/s. Patidar Hospital & ITO-2(1), Research Centre Ujjain बनाम/ 12-13,Kshapnak Mark, Freeganj (M.P.) Vs. Ujjain (M.P.) (Revenue ) (Appellant) P.A. No.AAJFP1661R Appellant by Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, A.Rs Respondent by Shri R.P. Mourya, DR Date of Hearing: 26.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: These t…

M/S. PATIDAR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE,UJJAIN vs. THE ITO 2(1), UJJAIN

In the result, ITA No.1007/Ind/2016 is partly allowed, is allowed and ITA

ITA 1008/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 40Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCHE, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1007, 1008 & 1541/Ind/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11,2012-13&2010-11 M/s. Patidar Hospital & ITO-2(1), Research Centre Ujjain बनाम/ 12-13,Kshapnak Mark, Freeganj (M.P.) Vs. Ujjain (M.P.) (Revenue ) (Appellant) P.A. No.AAJFP1661R Appellant by Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, A.Rs Respondent by Shri R.P. Mourya, DR Date of Hearing: 26.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: These t…

M/S. PATIDAR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE,UJJAIN vs. THE ITO 2(1), UJJAIN

In the result, ITA No.1007/Ind/2016 is partly allowed, is allowed and ITA

ITA 1007/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 40Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCHE, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1007, 1008 & 1541/Ind/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11,2012-13&2010-11 M/s. Patidar Hospital & ITO-2(1), Research Centre Ujjain बनाम/ 12-13,Kshapnak Mark, Freeganj (M.P.) Vs. Ujjain (M.P.) (Revenue ) (Appellant) P.A. No.AAJFP1661R Appellant by Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, A.Rs Respondent by Shri R.P. Mourya, DR Date of Hearing: 26.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: These t…

SHRI RAMESH KUMAR PABBI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5594/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. L. P. Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ramesh Kumar Pabbi ACIT Prop. of M/s. S. L. Enterprises Circle -38 (1) Vs A-41, Phase-II, Mayapuri New Delhi Industrial Area, New Delhi PAN AANPP5995Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Gautam Jain, Advocate Sh. Lalit Mohan, CA Respondent by Sh. S. R. Senapati, Sr DR Date of hearing: 20/07/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 01/08/2018 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JM: This appeal by the assessee has been directed against the order of Ld.…