Biswanath Samanta vs. ITO (1973) ITR 331 (Kol), Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar

229 Taxmann 444High Court2015#23777 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2022.

Judgments citing Biswanath Samanta vs. ITO (1973) ITR 331 (Kol), Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar

Narendra Mithailal Agrawal, Nashik vs. Asssistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 26/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteshri Narendra M. Agrawal Acit, Circle - 1 532, Aarti Steel Nashik Vs. 60 Feet Road, Sarda Circle Nashik 422001 Pan – Abgpa9107R Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Sanket Milind Joshi Respondent By: Shri S.P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing: 22.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Ay 2008-09 Is Against The Order Of The Cit(A) 1, Nashik Dated 06.10.2015 Passed In Case No. Nsk/Cit(A)-1/38/2014-15 Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Milind JoshiFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Shri Narendra M. Agrawal ACIT, Circle - 1 532, Aarti Steel Nashik Vs. 60 Feet Road, Sarda Circle Nashik 422001 PAN – ABGPA9107R Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Sanket Milind Joshi Respondent by: Shri S.P. Walimbe Date of Hearing: 22.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 04.05.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, JM This assessee’s appeal for AY 2008-09 is against the order of the CIT(A) 1, Nashik dated 06.10.2015 passed in case No. Nsk/CIT(A)-1/38/2014-15 involving proceedings under…

DCIT 12(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Amba Enterprised Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application filed by the assessee u/s 27 is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6326/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit 12(1)(1), M/S. Amba Enterprises Room No.223, Ltd., 2Nd Floor, 430, 4Th Floor, Blue Rose Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Industries, M.K. Road, Near Metro Bazar, Mumbai - 400020 W.E. Highway, Mumbai – 400 066 Pan: Aafca6033R (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Michael Jerald, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.05.2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT 12(1)(1), M/s. Amba Enterprises Room No.223, Ltd., 2nd Floor, 430, 4th Floor, Blue Rose Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Industries, M.K. Road, Near Metro Bazar, Mumbai - 400020 W.E. Highway, Mumbai – 400 066 PAN: AAFCA6033R (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Nishit Gandhi, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Michael Jerald, D.R. Date of Hearing : 05.03.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 27.05.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The…

ACIT, C.C. - 3(2), Kolkata vs. Sri Bijay Kumar Agarwal, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1942/KOL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2005-06

Section 147Section 148

…rded itself on the basis of reopening which speak otherwise, hence the entire proceeding i.e. issue of notice u/s. 148 and the consequential proceedings becomes void and for the same I draw support from the following Courts’ decisions: i) Pransukhlal Brothers 229 Taxmann 444 (Bom) ii) Munshi Mini Rice Mill v. ITO – ITA No.1650/Kol/2014 dt. 14.10.2014 iii) Northern Exim (P) Ltd. 337 ITR 586 (Del) ITA No.1942/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2005-06 ACIT,CC-3(2), Kol Vs. Sh. Bijay Kr.Agarwal Page 3 It is also observed that the AO in the reasons recorded has nowhere mentioned that there is “failure on the part of the assessee to disc…