Central Council for Research in Ayurveda v. D.K. Santha-kumari

319 ITR 1High Court2009#24448 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 356,934 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Judgments citing Central Council for Research in Ayurveda v. D.K. Santha-kumari

Archit Corporation, Bhavnagar vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 683/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Kambleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 683/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2014-2015 Archit Corporation Llp, I.T.O., (Earlier Known As Archit Corporation) Vs. Ward-2(3), 54, Ganesh Krupa, Bhavnagar. Vijayraj Nagar, Bhavnagar.

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.D.R
Section 234ASection 271Section 36Section 40

…e learned AR in support of his contention relied on the following judgments:  Department of Elementary Education vs. Pramod Kumar Sahoo-(2019) 10SCC 674;  Central Council for Research in Ayurveda vs. D.K. Santha-kumari-(2001) 5 SCC60;  DCIT vs. KS Suresh – 319 ITR 1(Mad.);  Krishna B. Agarwal Vs. ITO – ITA 2176/Ahd/2012; 8. On the other hand the learned DR vehemently opposed to accept the contention of the learned AR of the assessee. The learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 9. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record…

Ketan N. Shah (HUF), Vapi vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Vapi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 321/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.321/Srt/2018,िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Virtual Court) Ketan N. Shah (Huf), Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.275, Usha Hospital & Life Ward -5, Vapi. Science Charitable Trust, Near Cine Park, Chanod, Vapi – 396195. [Pan: Aahhk 4703 R] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Hardikvora– Ar िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 20.10.2020 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 20.10.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judical Memebr: 1. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1 [“Cit(A)” ], Valsad, State Of Gujarat,Dated 27.03.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-14.This Appeal Was Initially Adjudicated Vide Order Dated 31.07.2019. However, The Order Was Recalled Vide Order Dated 02.01.2020 In Ma No.59/Srt/2019, Thus, In The Aforesaid Background, The Appeal Was Heard Afresh.The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ,सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, Hon'ble JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARJUN LAL SAINI, Hon'ble ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.321/Srt/2018,िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Virtual Court) Ketan N. Shah (HUF), Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.275, Usha Hospital and Life Ward -5, Vapi. Science Charitable Trust, Near Cine Park, Chanod, Vapi – 396195. [PAN: AAHHK 4703 R] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri HardikVora– AR िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date…

Smt. Pragnaben N. Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 411/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Somogyan Pal, Sr.DR
Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 37(1)Section 57

…an assessee is not binding on assessee. Also, if a concession has been made inadvertently, then the appellant must be permitted to contest appeal on merits or else, it shall result in gross injustice. Reliance is placed on followings: > DCIT vs. K.S. Suresh - 319 ITR 1 (Mad); > Krishna B. Agarwal - ITA 2176/Ahd/2012 (Annexure "B"); Thus, the issue on hand issue deserves to be decided on merits rather than on sheer technicalities. Alternatively, if it is presumed that such funds have not been utilized wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning interest income, then such interest expenses may be allowed unde…

Central Council for Research in Ayurveda v. D.K. Santha-kumari (319 ITR 1) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax