Calcutta (xvii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd.

332 ITR 468High Court#5265 most cited
22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 292CSection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 115BBESection 132Section 69Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

section 38section 153a(1)(b)section 91section 292csection 65bsection 65section 131(1a)survey under section 133abeneficial ownerpanchnamasection 132(4a)section 292

Judgments citing Calcutta (xvii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd.

The ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal vs. Shri Vinod Vaish, Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 189/IND/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shyam Sunder Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5448/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 5448/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Shyam Sunder Jindal, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 12A, Green Avenue, Sector-D, Tax, Central Circle-30, Pocket-3, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagpj0184N Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Rohit Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.08.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(viii)Section 4

…ned by the ld. CIT(A) was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Ved Prakash Choudhary 305 ITR 245 (Del.) " CIT Vs Anil Bhalla 322 ITR 191 (Del.) " CIT Vs Lubtec India Ltd. 311 ITR 175 (Del.) " CIT Vs Atam Valves (P.) Ltd. 332 ITR 468 (P&H) " CIT Vs Dolphin Builders (P.) Ltd. 356 ITR 420 (MP) " ACIT Vs Sharad Chaudhary 165 TTJ 145 (Del. Trib.) " CIT Vs Ravi Kumar 294 ITR 78 (P&H) " ITO Vs Twinkle Papers (P.) Ltd. 95 TTJ 987 (Chd. Trib.) (TM) 17. In his rival submissions the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that the AO made a r…