CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd.

96 DTR 299Reported decision2013#13041 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 24(1), Mumbai vs. Abani Sarbeswar Das, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 232/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri RA Dhyani, DRFor Respondent: Shri Bhupendra Shah, AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री एन. के. प्रिान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 193/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 232/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Asst. Commissioner of M/s Abani Sarbeswar Das Income Tax, Circle 24(1), 202, Sri Krishna Opp. Laxmi Room No. 604, 6th Floor, Industrial Estate, Andheri Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, (W), Mumbai-400 053 Parel, Mumbai-…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 24(1), Mumbai vs. Abani Sarbeswar Das, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 193/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri RA Dhyani, DRFor Respondent: Shri Bhupendra Shah, AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री एन. के. प्रिान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 193/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 232/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Asst. Commissioner of M/s Abani Sarbeswar Das Income Tax, Circle 24(1), 202, Sri Krishna Opp. Laxmi Room No. 604, 6th Floor, Industrial Estate, Andheri Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, (W), Mumbai-400 053 Parel, Mumbai-…

Jitendra M Kitavat, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result,appeals filed by the AO are rejected and the appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 7049/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7049 & 7050/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ays: 2009-10 & 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan: Aabpk9960C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील संसंसंसं././././I.T.A./7099 & 7102/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.S: 2009-10 & 2007-08 अपील अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

…tion, the ld.AR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO V/s Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd reported in (2013) 96 DTR 299, wherein it has been held that there was a clear lack of enquiry on the part of the AO. Once the assessee had furnished all the material including PAN, loan confirmations and bank statements, in such an eventuality, no addition can be made u/s 68 of the Act. According to the ld.AR, the AO merely proceeded on the basis of information received from…

ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Jitendra Madanlal Kitawat (HUF), Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the AO is rejected and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7100/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7047/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat (Huf) Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan:Assesseebpk 9960 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7100/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat(Huf) Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

…tion, the ld.AR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO V/s Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd reported in (2013) 96 DTR 299, wherein it has been held that there was a clear lack of enquiry on the part of the AO. Once the assessee had furnished all the material including PAN, loan confirmations and bank statements, in such an eventuality, no addition can be made u/s 68 of the Act. According to the ld.AR, the AO merely proceeded on the basis of information received from…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 32(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1071/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…tion, the ld.AR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO V/s Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd reported in (2013) 96 DTR 299, wherein it has been held that there was a clear lack of enquiry on the part of the AO. Once the assessee had furnished all the material including PAN, loan confirmations and bank statements, in such an eventuality, no addition can be made u/s 68 of the Act. According to the ld.AR, the AO merely proceeded on the basis of information received from…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 32(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1070/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…tion, the ld.AR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO V/s Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd reported in (2013) 96 DTR 299, wherein it has been held that there was a clear lack of enquiry on the part of the AO. Once the assessee had furnished all the material including PAN, loan confirmations and bank statements, in such an eventuality, no addition can be made u/s 68 of the Act. According to the ld.AR, the AO merely proceeded on the basis of information received from…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 32(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1069/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…tion, the ld.AR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO V/s Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd reported in (2013) 96 DTR 299, wherein it has been held that there was a clear lack of enquiry on the part of the AO. Once the assessee had furnished all the material including PAN, loan confirmations and bank statements, in such an eventuality, no addition can be made u/s 68 of the Act. According to the ld.AR, the AO merely proceeded on the basis of information received from…

ACIT 32(3), Mumbai vs. Reliance Corporation, Mumbai

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

ITA 4946/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…tion, the ld.AR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO V/s Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd reported in (2013) 96 DTR 299, wherein it has been held that there was a clear lack of enquiry on the part of the AO. Once the assessee had furnished all the material including PAN, loan confirmations and bank statements, in such an eventuality, no addition can be made u/s 68 of the Act. According to the ld.AR, the AO merely proceeded on the basis of information received from…

CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. (96 DTR 299) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax