Chhattisgarh, Ardent Steel Ltd. v. ACIT

405 ITR 422Reported decision#25018 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Judgments citing Chhattisgarh, Ardent Steel Ltd. v. ACIT

ITO 13 (2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SAMRIDDHI FINVEST ADVISORY SERVICES PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7789/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhito-13(2)(1) Vs. M/S Samriddhi Finvest Room No. 147, 1 St Floor, Advisory Services Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, May Road, Mumbai – 400020 Building, 297/299/301, Princess Sreet, Near Marine Lines Flyover, Mumbai - 400002 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccd9469K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: k. Shivaram Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: B.K. Bagchi

Section 106Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143Section 148Section 292CSection 69

…of the Act. These facts demonstrate that prior to issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the new address was already on record with the A.O. The ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, Ardent Steel Ltd. Vs. ACIT 405 ITR 422 (Chhatisgarh) that issue of notice at old address in spite of change in the official record by updating PAN data base is held to be bad in law. The ld. Counsel referred the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Haljeet Suraprakash Girotra V. UOI (2019) 266 taxman 29 (Bom) (HC) wherein held that mere issue of notice u/s 148 is not suffi…

SANJAYKUMAR GANGARAM PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2,, PATAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 633/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2006-07 Sanjaykumar Gangaram Patel Ito, Ward-2 Chokshino Dhhar Vs Patan. Nr.Chabutra Unjha, Dist : Mehsana. Pan : Aqlpp 7700 M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.V. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13 /05/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.12.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Gandhinagar Relating To The Asst.Year 2006-07. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Is That The Assessee Is An Individual & Stated To Be In Public Service. For The Asst.Year 2006-07, The Assessee Has Not Filed His Return Of Income. Annual Information Return Details Available With The Income-Tax Department Revealed That The Assessee Has Made Cash Deposits Of Rs.13,25,490/- In Bank Account With Hdfc Bank, Unjha. As The Assessee Has Not Filed Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Reopened Based On The Information Received In Air & After Verification, Notice Under 2

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (Conducted Through Virtual Court) ] ] BEFORE S/SHRI PRAMOD M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT AND T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year :2006-07 Sanjaykumar Gangaram Patel ITO, Ward-2 Chokshino Dhhar Vs Patan. Nr.Chabutra Unjha, Dist : Mehsana. PAN : AQLPP 7700 M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.V. Agrawal, AR Revenue by : Shri S.S. Sh…

INDIAN CLOTHING LEAGUE(P) LTD.,NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Clothing League (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, Rupinder Kumar Aggarwal, Ward-26(2), Advocate, B-1A/22H, New Delhi. Sector-51, Noida. Pan: Aaccv3439R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…vant and extraneous consideration and had no nexus or basis so as to not to quash impugned order of assessment in absence of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. For the above proposition, he relied on the following decisions:- i) Ardent Steel Ltd. v. ACIT 405 ITR 422 (Chattisgarh); ii) Pr. CIT v. Atlanta Capital (P) Ltd. 119 Taxmann.com 292 (Del), affirmed by the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Atlantal Capital (P) Ltd. reported in 274 Taxman 224 (SC); and iii) CIT v. Eshaan Holding (P) Ltd. 344 ITR 541 (Del) 9. The ld. Counsel for the assessee accordingly submitted that since no notice u/…