CIT v. Dinesh Goyal

331 ITR 16Reported decision#20542 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 331,145 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 115WBSection 115WB of Income Tax ActSection 143(3)Section 143(3) of Income Tax ActSection 145(1)Section 145(1) of Income Tax ActSection 145(2)Section 145(2) of Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 145(1)section 209substance over formsection 145(2)section 35dsection 194hright to receivesection 14a(2)computer softwaresection 35mercantile system of accountingsection 36(1)(iii)

Judgments citing CIT v. Dinesh Goyal

JCIT (OSD) Circle- 16(2), New Delhi vs. Mayar Health Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3548/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

…e to the membership amount are completely provided to the customers, the same cannot be ITA No. 3548/Del/2018 Mayar Health Resorts Pvt. Ltd. treated as income. The ld. AR relied on the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dinesh Goyal (331 ITR 16), the Special bench of ITAT in ACIT Vs. Mahindra Resort (131 TTJ 1). Further, the ld. AR submitted that the Revenue itself in the subsequent year i.e. A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 has accepted the accounting of membership fee from the assessee. Therefore, the settled position accepted by the Revenue itself cannot be disturbed. The ld. AR also sub…

Mayar Health Resorts Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 326/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

…e to the membership amount are completely provided to the customers, the same cannot be ITA No. 3548/Del/2018 Mayar Health Resorts Pvt. Ltd. treated as income. The ld. AR relied on the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dinesh Goyal (331 ITR 16), the Special bench of ITAT in ACIT Vs. Mahindra Resort (131 TTJ 1). Further, the ld. AR submitted that the Revenue itself in the subsequent year i.e. A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 has accepted the accounting of membership fee from the assessee. Therefore, the settled position accepted by the Revenue itself cannot be disturbed. The ld. AR also sub…

Mayar Health Resorts Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 6228/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

…e to the membership amount are completely provided to the customers, the same cannot be ITA No. 3548/Del/2018 Mayar Health Resorts Pvt. Ltd. treated as income. The ld. AR relied on the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dinesh Goyal (331 ITR 16), the Special bench of ITAT in ACIT Vs. Mahindra Resort (131 TTJ 1). Further, the ld. AR submitted that the Revenue itself in the subsequent year i.e. A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 has accepted the accounting of membership fee from the assessee. Therefore, the settled position accepted by the Revenue itself cannot be disturbed. The ld. AR also sub…

Mayar Health Resorts Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 5109/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)Section 209Section 35D(2)(c)

…e to the membership amount are completely provided to the customers, the same cannot be ITA No. 3548/Del/2018 Mayar Health Resorts Pvt. Ltd. treated as income. The ld. AR relied on the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dinesh Goyal (331 ITR 16), the Special bench of ITAT in ACIT Vs. Mahindra Resort (131 TTJ 1). Further, the ld. AR submitted that the Revenue itself in the subsequent year i.e. A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 has accepted the accounting of membership fee from the assessee. Therefore, the settled position accepted by the Revenue itself cannot be disturbed. The ld. AR also sub…