Bombay CIT v. Gabrial India Ltd.

114 CTR 81High Court1993#22046 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Judgments citing Bombay CIT v. Gabrial India Ltd.

Procter and Gamble Health Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2326/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji & Shri Ajay BhandariFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT D/R

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 40Section 50CSection 56(2)(x)Section 68

…by itself give occasion to the Commissioner to pass orders under section 263 of the Act, merely because he has a different opinion in the matter. It is only in cases of "lack of inquiry" that such a course of action would be open. In Gabriel India Ltd. [1993] 114 CTR 81/203 ITR 108/CIT v. Gabriel India Ltd. [1993] 71 Taxman 585/203 ITR 108 (Bom.), law on this aspect was discussed in the following manner (page 113) ***" 23. A similar view was taken by this Court in the case of CIT v. Anil Kumar Sharma [2010] 194 Тахтап 504/[2011] 335 ITR 83 (Delhi)/[2010] SCC OnLine Del 838, wherein, it was held that once it is in…

Syscom Corporation Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT-3, Mumbai

ITA 1608/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1608/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Hariom TulsyanFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Billa, DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 263

…dia Ltd. [2008] 166 Taxman 188 (SC)/[2007] 295ITR 282 (SC)/[2007] 213 CTR 266 (SC) 6 I.T.A. No. 1608/Mum/2018 M/s Syscom Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Gabriel India Ltd. [1993] 71 Taxman 585 (Bombay)/[1993] 203 ITR 108 (Bombay)/[1993] 114 CTR 81 (Bombay High Court) Harihar Housing Agency vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-l, Nagpur [2017] 83 taxmann.com 48 (Nagpur- Trib.) (ITAT Nagpur) 9) Thus, all material facts and documents were available with the AO during the course of assessment proceedings and relevant inquiries made by the AO were duly replied by the assessee. Based on all documents…

M/S. Enfield Gems & Jewellery Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT, Kolkata-I, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 33/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jun 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2012-13 M/s Enfield Gems & Commissioner of बनाम Jewellery Ltd., 4/1A, Income Tax, Central-1, / V/s. Jagmohan Mullick Aayakar Bhawan Lane, 4th Floor, Poorva, 110, Kolkata-700 007 Shantipally, Kolkata- [PAN No.AABCE 8009 P] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri S.Srivastava, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 02-05-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 29-06-2016 घोषणा क" तार…