How many judgments cite CIT v. Harishchandra Gupta?

29 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Harishchandra Gupta (325 ITR 599), spanning 2016 to 2024.

CIT v. Harishchandra Gupta

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Harishchandra Gupta come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 1961 - Sections 14A, Section 1962 - Rule 8D, Section 22, Section 23, Section 23(1)(c).

325 ITR 599High Court2010#4035 most cited

What is CIT v. Harishchandra Gupta authority for?

The principle of consistency mandates that if an assessee's facts in earlier and subsequent assessment years are identical to the year under consideration, they should not be denied exemption under sections 11/12 of the Act.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Harishchandra Gupta · 325 ITR 599 · Section 11 · Section 12 · Principle of Consistency · Charitable Trust Exemption · Trust Income

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 1961 - Sections 14A Section 1962 - Rule 8D Section 22 Section 23 Section 23(1)(c)Section 23(5)Section 80-IA(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 13(2)(c)section 144(b)advancement of general public utility section 12a(a)section 13(2)section 11(4a)section 13(3)section 13(1)(c)section 11(1)(a)section 13(1)section 40a(2)section 11(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Harishchandra Gupta

Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 4560/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

…xport Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 (Del), CIT V. Dalmial Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.), DIT(E) v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) CIT V. Girish. Mohan Ganeriwala: 260 ITR 417 (P&H) CIT vs. Sewa Bharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) CIT vs. P. Khrishna Warrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) CIT vs. Harishchandra Gupta 132 ITR 799 (Ori) g) In view of the aforesaid, it is submitted that classification and acceptance of “golf course” as “plant” in the initial year(s) operates as res-judicata and binds both the assessee and the Revenue. In these circumstances, the assessing officer h…

M/S Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 138/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 653/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 4849/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

Khagol Mandal, Mumbai vs. D.I.T. (Exemption), Mumbai

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

ITA 4538/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri. R.P.Meena & Harkamal Sohi

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…aim for exemption under Sections 11/12 of the Act. On the point of law, the Learned Representative relied upon the following judgments :- (i) Sonepat Hindu Educational & Charitable Society vs. CIT, 278 ITR 262 (P&H); (ii) CIT vs. Sewa Bharti Haryana Pradesh, 325 ITR 599 (P&H); and, (iii) Shri Chandrabhan Athare Patil Gram Navodaya Trust vs CIT-1, Pune, [2012] 22 taxmann.com 406 (Pune) 7. Insofar as the factual aspects are concerned, the Learned Representative referred to the Annual Accounts of the preceding three years to point out that substantial funds have been incurred towards the objects of the Trust. Furt…

Rajkot Jilla Gayatri Parivar Trust, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Commr. of Income Tax-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 52/RJT/2016[-]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Mar 2019

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.52/Rjt/2016 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : - ) Rajkot Jilla Gayatri Parivar The Commissioner Of बनाम/ Trust Income-Tax-I Vs. 7-Vashalinagar Rajkot Opp. Amrapali Cinema Raiya Road, Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : None (Written Submission) ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Jitendra Kumar, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…ed by revenue. Therefore Tribunal had rightly continued the benefits to assessee U/s 80G(5). The appeal was wholly without merit and the same was accordingly dismissed vide CIT v. Sewa Bharati Rajkot Jilla Gayatri Parivar Trust vs. CIT Haryana Pradesh (2010) 325 ITR 599 (P&H). Also see, D.J. Shah Foundation v. DIT (Exemption) (2010) 6 ITR (Trib) 196 (Kol 'A' - Trib). 8.3 The above views has also been accepted in the following decisions Accepting the principals viz Renewal of approval vis-a-vis rule of consistency. 8.4. As there was no change in the facts and circumstances vis -a-vis the object of assessee - so…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue against the direction of the Ld

ITA 1106/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.K.Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Centre, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle- New Friends Colony, 10(2), New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan: Aaacg1622K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle-10(2), 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Cr Building, Ip Estate, Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaacg1622K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Meeta Singh CIT DR

Section 144Section 144CSection 14A

….) - CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.) - DIT v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) - CIT v. P. KhrishnaWarrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) - CIT v Harishchandra Gupta 132 ITR 799 (Ori) - CIT v. SewaBharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) o CIT v. Rajasthan Breweries Limited.: ITA 889/2009 (Del) – SLP dismissed. Thus, in view of the above, the department having accepted that the aforesaid units were eligible to claim deduction under section 80IA of the Act in the preceding year, the same stand ought not to be changed/ modified, during the year under consideration, even on th…

Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas), Delhi vs. ADIT(Exemption), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2267/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri N. C. Swain, CIT [DR]

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13Section 142Section 2(15)

…CIT V. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.) - DIT v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) - CIT vs. P. KhrishnaWarrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) - CIT vs. Harishchandra Gupta 132 ITR 799 (Ori) - CIT vs. SewaBharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) In the impugned order, the CIT(A) did not apply the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang (supra), observing that in the said decision the Court applied principle of consistency in the facts of that case and the said principle does not have application in other cases drawing strength from the following concluding o…

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

ITA 196/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: 1. Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92D

…mia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.) (vi) DIT v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) (vii) CIT v. P. KhrishnaWarrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) (viii) CIT v Harishchandra Gupta 132 ITR 799 (Ori) (ix) CIT v. SewaBharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) (x) CIT v. Rajasthan Breweries Limited.: ITA 889/2009 (Del) – SLP dismissed. Thus, he submitted that the revenue having accepted that the aforesaid units were eligible to claim deduction under section 80IB/IC of the Act in all the earlier years, the same stand ought not to be changed/ modified during the year under consideration even on th…