Chandrakanta, 205 ITR 607 (MP), CIT vs S. Krishnaswamy & Sons, 219 ITR 157, A.M. Shah & Co. v. CIT

177 ITR 405High Court#23181 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2017.

Judgments citing Chandrakanta, 205 ITR 607 (MP), CIT vs S. Krishnaswamy & Sons, 219 ITR 157, A.M. Shah & Co. v. CIT

Taurus Transport, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 13(2), Mumbai

The Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4979/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 271(1)(c)Section 51

…an be levied even on a estimate basis for which reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Smt. Chandrakanta, 205 ITR 607 (MP), CIT vs S. Krishnaswamy & Sons, 219 ITR 157, A.M. Shah & Co. vs CIT, 238 ITR 415 (Guj.) and CIT vs Mohammad Warasat Hussain, 177 ITR 405 (Pat.). 3.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm, declared income of `6,24,135/- in its return filed on 30/09/2009. A survey action was carried out u/s 133A of the Act at the premises of the assessee on 15/01/2009. The Ld. Ass…

Taurus Transport, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 13(2), Mumbai

The Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4978/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 271(1)(c)Section 51

…an be levied even on a estimate basis for which reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Smt. Chandrakanta, 205 ITR 607 (MP), CIT vs S. Krishnaswamy & Sons, 219 ITR 157, A.M. Shah & Co. vs CIT, 238 ITR 415 (Guj.) and CIT vs Mohammad Warasat Hussain, 177 ITR 405 (Pat.). 3.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm, declared income of `6,24,135/- in its return filed on 30/09/2009. A survey action was carried out u/s 133A of the Act at the premises of the assessee on 15/01/2009. The Ld. Ass…

Arun Kumar Gupta (HUF), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 871/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Saxena, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Jaiswal, Senior DR
Section 142Section 143Section 37(1)

…erefore, it would be allowable as business expenditure u/s 37 of the Act and in this regard, he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Calcutta and Punjab & Haryana High Courts in the case of CIT vs. J.K. Industries Pvt. Ltd. – 125 ITR 218 and CIT vs. Suri Sons – 177 ITR 405, which were also relied before the lower authorities. Ld. AR further drew our attention to a recent Full Bench judgment by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Airport Authority of India Vs CIT (Delhi), which was also relied upon before the ld. CIT (A). He submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has considered the question as to whe…

Chandrakanta, 205 ITR 607 (MP), CIT vs S. Krishnaswamy & Sons, 219 ITR 157, A.M. Shah & Co. v. CIT (177 ITR 405) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax