CIT v. G.K. Sanniappan

298 ITR 274High Court2008#18036 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 158BCSection 254

Judgments citing CIT v. G.K. Sanniappan

DCIT,CC-2(4), CHENNAI vs. V.BASKARAN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 604/CHNY/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Srinivas, Sr. Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 158B

…he Assessing Officer is duty bound to complete the assessment in conformity with earlier directions of the Tribunal in I.T.(SS)A.No.90/Mds/2006 dated 14.12.2007 at paras 19 & 20 as well as by following the ratio laid down in the case of CIT v.R.M. Patel (HUF) 298 ITR 274(Mad). The assessee is also directed to cooperative with the Department for completing the assessment.” 2.2 In view of the above directions of ITAT, the AO issued detailed questionnaire dated 27.02.2017 calling for the sources in respect of various additions, which we will discuss in later part of this order. Accordingly, this block assessment wa…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI VI vs. TUSHAR STOCK & SHARE BROKERS P. LTD.

ITA/572/2008HC Delhi25 Mar 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 132ASection 158B

…onducted on third party and requisition made in that regard. Since no requisition was made, no addition could have been made on the basis of the entries found in the diary. He relied upon CIT v. G.K. Sanniappan, 284 ITR 220 and CIT v. R.M. Patel (HUF), 298 ITR 274. 17. The learned counsel also submitted that in any case, requisition was made under Section 132A on 20th January, 1997 of Rs.2,41,000/- seized by ED, but notice under Section 158BC was issued to the assessees only on 22nd October, 1999 and that being highly belated, the proceedings initiated under Section 158BD of the Act are untenable…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX XIII vs. MITTAL CONSUL & CO

ITA/1277/2007HC Delhi25 Mar 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 132ASection 158B

…onducted on third party and requisition made in that regard. Since no requisition was made, no addition could have been made on the basis of the entries found in the diary. He relied upon CIT v. G.K. Sanniappan, 284 ITR 220 and CIT v. R.M. Patel (HUF), 298 ITR 274. 17. The learned counsel also submitted that in any case, requisition was made under Section 132A on 20th January, 1997 of Rs.2,41,000/- seized by ED, but notice under Section 158BC was issued to the assessees only on 22nd October, 1999 and that being highly belated, the proceedings initiated under Section 158BD of the Act are untenable…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI XIII vs. R.K.MITTAL

ITA/928/2008HC Delhi25 Mar 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 132ASection 158B

…onducted on third party and requisition made in that regard. Since no requisition was made, no addition could have been made on the basis of the entries found in the diary. He relied upon CIT v. G.K. Sanniappan, 284 ITR 220 and CIT v. R.M. Patel (HUF), 298 ITR 274. 17. The learned counsel also submitted that in any case, requisition was made under Section 132A on 20th January, 1997 of Rs.2,41,000/- seized by ED, but notice under Section 158BC was issued to the assessees only on 22nd October, 1999 and that being highly belated, the proceedings initiated under Section 158BD of the Act are untenable…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI VI vs. TUSHAR STOCK & SHARE BROKERS P. LTD.

ITA - 572 / 2008HC Delhi25 Mar 2011
Section 132ASection 158B

…onducted on third party and requisition made in that regard. Since no requisition was made, no addition could have been made on the basis of the entries found in the diary. He relied upon CIT v. G.K. Sanniappan, 284 ITR 220 and CIT v. R.M. Patel (HUF), 298 ITR 274. 17. The learned counsel also submitted that in any case, requisition was made under Section 132A on 20th January, 1997 of Rs.2,41,000/- seized by ED, but notice under Section 158BC was issued to the assessees only on 22nd October, 1999 and that being highly belated, the proceedings initiated under Section 158BD of the Act are untenable…