CIT v. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd.

308 ITR 243High Court2009#15594 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd.

Gujarat Power Corporation Limited-Gpcl, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1863/AHD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

…ts income were not disclosed by it and relied upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. [2010] 189 taxmann.com 322, the Jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. [2009] 308 ITR 243 and the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd. [2014] 40 taxmann.com 569. Thus the Ld. Senior Counsel pleaded that the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is not justifiable and the same liable to be deleted. Ld. Senior Counsel further submitted that the quantum appeals for the assessment years 200…

Gujarat Power Corporation Limited-Gpcl, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1862/AHD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

…ts income were not disclosed by it and relied upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. [2010] 189 taxmann.com 322, the Jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. [2009] 308 ITR 243 and the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd. [2014] 40 taxmann.com 569. Thus the Ld. Senior Counsel pleaded that the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is not justifiable and the same liable to be deleted. Ld. Senior Counsel further submitted that the quantum appeals for the assessment years 200…

Gujarat Power Corporation Limited-Gpcl, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1861/AHD/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

…ts income were not disclosed by it and relied upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. [2010] 189 taxmann.com 322, the Jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. [2009] 308 ITR 243 and the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd. [2014] 40 taxmann.com 569. Thus the Ld. Senior Counsel pleaded that the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is not justifiable and the same liable to be deleted. Ld. Senior Counsel further submitted that the quantum appeals for the assessment years 200…

Gujarat Power Corporation Limited-Gpcl, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1860/AHD/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

…ts income were not disclosed by it and relied upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. [2010] 189 taxmann.com 322, the Jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. [2009] 308 ITR 243 and the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd. [2014] 40 taxmann.com 569. Thus the Ld. Senior Counsel pleaded that the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is not justifiable and the same liable to be deleted. Ld. Senior Counsel further submitted that the quantum appeals for the assessment years 200…

Reliance Corporate It Park Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 3, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2748/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.2748/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Reliance Corporate It Park Ltd., बनधम/ Principal Commissioner Of Maker Tower E, 7Th Floor, Income Tax-6, Vs. A Wing- Cuff Parade Mumbai- 612, Aayakar Bhavan, 400005 Mk Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aabcd7169H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से/Appellant By : Shri Arvind Sonde प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 3.2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 20.3.2015, Passed By Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -3, Mumbai Under Section 263, Setting Aside The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 20.3.2013 For Passing It Afresh. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Ground No.1 (I) The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax- 3, (Hereinafter Referred To As Cit) Erred In Passing The Order Under Section 263 Of The Act, By Holding That The Assessment Order Passed By The Oy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -3(3), Mumbai (Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…Corporation Limited V DC IT (2016) 69 taxmann.com 317(Del-Trib); vi) Industrial Development Corporation of India v. CIT - 268 ITR 130 (Orissa High Court) vii) CIT V/s Zuari Finance Ltd. and Another – 271 ITR 538(Bom); viii) CIT V/s v. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. - - 308 ITR 243(Guj); 8 I . T . A . N o . 2 7 4 8 / M u m / 2 0 1 5 ix) CIT V/s Cosmo Films Ltd. - - 338 ITR 266 (Del); x) CIT V/s George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. - 265 ITR 626(Guw); xi) Bharti Hexacom Ltd. v. ACIT (2016) 68 taxmann.Com 357 (Del-Trib) xii) IClCI Bank Ltd vs. JCIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITA Nos.3643 & 3644/Mum/2001; xiii) SICOM Ltd. v. JCIT [2013]40 taxma…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Cosmo Films Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1404/2008HC Delhi18 Jul 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

For Appellant: Ms Suruchi AggarwalFor Respondent: Mr Ajay Vohra with Ms Kavita Jha, Mr Sriram Krishna
Section 260

…ation of Orissa Limited v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Others: 268 ITR 130 (Ori); 2) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rajasthan State Electricity Board: (2006) 204 CTR 415 (Raj); 3) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gujarat Gas Company Limited: (2009) 308 ITR 243 (Guj); 4) SBI Home Finance Limited v. Commissioner of Income-tax: 280 ITR 6 (Cal); 5) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Zuari Finance Limited and Another: 271 ITR 538; 6) Commissioner of Income-tax v. George Williamson (Assam) Limited: 265 ITR 626 (Gau). ITA No.1404/08 Page No.8 of 21 7. Mr Vohra also referred to the…

CIT v. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. (308 ITR 243) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax