CIT v. Avtar Singh (P&H) (HC)

219 CTR 588High Court#23799 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT v. Avtar Singh (P&H) (HC)

SMT. PUSHPA CHHAJER,JODHPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 136/JODH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

…i. CIT vs. Chetan Gupta (2016) 382 ITR, Delhi High Court ii. CIT vs. Eshaan Holding (P) Ltd. 344 ITR 541, Delhi High Court iii. ITO vs. Hepta Developers Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 3608 of 2014 (ITAT Delhi) Date of order 08.07.2015 iv. CIT vs. Avtar Singh (P&H) (HC), 219 CTR 588 v. CIT vs. Eqbal Singh Sindhana 304 ITR 177 (Delhi) vi. ACIT vs. Vindhya Talylinks Ltd. 107 TTJ 149 (JAB)(TM) CIT vs. Hotline International (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 333 (Del) vii. CIT vs. Laxmi Narain 168 Taxman 128 (P&H) (HC) viii. Ram Singh Mathur vs. ITO, ITA 834/2005, date of order 21.09.2007 (Delhi ITAT) ix. Venkat Naicken & Anr. vs. ITO, 242 ITR 1…

NAVEEN TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 2089/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2089/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Naveen Tyagi Ito C/O M/S Sanjeev Anand & Vs. Ward 1(2), Associates, 77, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Admpt7873K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ecisions: • CIT vs. Chetan Gupta (2016) 382 ITR, Delhi High Court • CIT vs. Eshaan Holding (P) Ltd. 344 ITR 541, Delhi High Court • ITO vs. Hepta Developers Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 3608 of 2014 (ITAT Delhi) Date of order 08.07.2015 • CIT vs. Avtar Singh (P&H) (HC), 219 CTR 588 • CIT vs. Eqbal Singh Sindhana 304 ITR 177 (Delhi) • ACIT vs. Vindhya Talylinks Ltd. 107 TTJ 149 (JAB)(TM) • CIT vs. Hotline International (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 333 (Del) I.T.A.No.2089/Del/2018 • CIT vs. Laxmi Narain 168 Taxman 128 (P&H) (HC) • Ram Singh Mathur vs. ITO, ITA 834/2005, date of order 21.09.2007 (Delhi ITAT) • Venkat Naicken & Anr. vs.…

AKHTAR KHAN,NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(1), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 138/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.138/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Akhtar Khan Ito C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, Vs. Ward 1(1), South Extension, Part-1, Noida. New Delhi. Pan No. Amapk6768M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…etan Gupta 382 ITR 613 (Del); 3. Pr. CIT Vs. Atlanta Capital Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 665/2015 dated 21.09.2015 (Del. HC); 4. CIT vs. Hotline International (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 333 (Del) (HC); 5. CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar Sharma 311 ITR 235 (Del) (HC); 6. CIT Vs. Avtar Singh 219 CTR 588 (P&H High Court). 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that on inspection of the records it is found that the notice was sent to the old address of the assessee and the notice was returned by the postal authorities and the same was kept on record by the AO and, therefore, the said notice was never served on the assessee. 4. The Ld. DR cou…