CIT (1999) 70 ITD 77, 113 (TM) 3. S.P.Goel v. DCIT

288 ITR 498Reported decision2007#8946 most cited

What is CIT (1999) 70 ITD 77, 113 (TM) 3. S.P.Goel v. DCIT authority for?

The case is authority for the proposition that certain decisions are binding only on the bench that made them.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2020.

Also referred to as

S.P.Goel v. DCIT · ITAT · jurisdiction · binding precedent · jurisdictional bench · Full Bench · coordinate bench

Judgments citing CIT (1999) 70 ITD 77, 113 (TM) 3. S.P.Goel v. DCIT

Maruti N. Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 705/PUN/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

Maruti N. Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 704/PUN/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

Maruti N. Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 703/PUN/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

Maruti N. Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 702/PUN/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

Maruti N. Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 701/PUN/2014[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

Maruti Nivrutti Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 1061/PUN/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

Maruti Nivrutti Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 1060/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

Maruti Nivrutti Navale, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in WTA No

ITA 1059/PUN/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad

…Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the said para 3.14 and 3.15 of the order of the CIT(A) are extracted hereunder :- “3.14 In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Rajpal Singh Avatar 288 ITR 498. However, the case of the appellant is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the documents in question were found in the debris lying in the shop. The writings in the document were in English and it was the submission of the assessees that none of them knew the language. Moreover, in that case what the AO had brought to tax in the hands of the…

ACIT, Udaipur vs. M/S. Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur

ITA 295/JODH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., Udaipur. 54-55, Rajdeep, New Fatehpura, Udaipur. Pan No. Aagca 9897 C

Section 132ASection 254(2)

…guments assessee also relied on ratio of the following decided cases. 1. Ashwni Kumar v/s ITO (1991) 39 ITD 286 (Delhi). 2. D.N.Kamani (HUF) v/s CIT (1999) 70 ITD 77, 113 (TM) 3. S.P.Goel V/s DCIT (2002) 82 ITD 85 Mumbai 4. CIT v/s Rajpalsingh Ramavat (2007) 288 ITR 498 (Allab) 5. Ram Traders v/s First Income Tax Officer, 25 ITD 599(TM) (Pat) 6. CIT v/s Dharampal Premchand Limited (2007) 295 ITR 105(Delhi) 7. CIT V/s Khazan Singh and borther (2008) 304 ITR 234(P&H) 8. CIT V/s R.K.Venketchanalam (2008) 301 ITR 236(Mad) 9. CIT V/s Maulik Kumar K shah (2008) 307 ITR 137 (Guj) 10. Prakash Chandra Nahata V/s CIT (200…

ACIT, Udaipur vs. M/S. Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur

ITA 180/JODH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., Udaipur. 54-55, Rajdeep, New Fatehpura, Udaipur. Pan No. Aagca 9897 C

Section 132ASection 254(2)

…guments assessee also relied on ratio of the following decided cases. 1. Ashwni Kumar v/s ITO (1991) 39 ITD 286 (Delhi). 2. D.N.Kamani (HUF) v/s CIT (1999) 70 ITD 77, 113 (TM) 3. S.P.Goel V/s DCIT (2002) 82 ITD 85 Mumbai 4. CIT v/s Rajpalsingh Ramavat (2007) 288 ITR 498 (Allab) 5. Ram Traders v/s First Income Tax Officer, 25 ITD 599(TM) (Pat) 6. CIT v/s Dharampal Premchand Limited (2007) 295 ITR 105(Delhi) 7. CIT V/s Khazan Singh and borther (2008) 304 ITR 234(P&H) 8. CIT V/s R.K.Venketchanalam (2008) 301 ITR 236(Mad) 9. CIT V/s Maulik Kumar K shah (2008) 307 ITR 137 (Guj) 10. Prakash Chandra Nahata V/s CIT (200…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Rajesh Kumar Kanodia, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and that of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4241/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4241/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jian, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathy, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 153A

…made by the AO was not sustainable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Ved Prakash Chaudhary (2008) 305 ITR 245 (Del.) " CIT Vs S.M.S. Investment Corporation (P) Ltd. (1994) 207 ITR 364 (Raj.) " CIT Vs Raj Pal Singh Ram Avtar (2007) 288 ITR 498 (Ald.) 35. The ld. CIT(A), however, did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee and confirmed the addition by observing in paras 4.4.3 and 4.4.4. of the impugned order which read as under: “4.4.3 I have considered the submission of the AR, the assessment order and the seized document. It is noted that the assessee has made cash payment…

Rajesh Kumar Kanodia, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and that of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3670/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4241/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jian, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathy, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 153A

…made by the AO was not sustainable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Ved Prakash Chaudhary (2008) 305 ITR 245 (Del.) " CIT Vs S.M.S. Investment Corporation (P) Ltd. (1994) 207 ITR 364 (Raj.) " CIT Vs Raj Pal Singh Ram Avtar (2007) 288 ITR 498 (Ald.) 35. The ld. CIT(A), however, did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee and confirmed the addition by observing in paras 4.4.3 and 4.4.4. of the impugned order which read as under: “4.4.3 I have considered the submission of the AR, the assessment order and the seized document. It is noted that the assessee has made cash payment…

CIT (1999) 70 ITD 77, 113 (TM) 3. S.P.Goel v. DCIT (288 ITR 498) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax