CIT v. Kapil Jain

50 DTR 342High Court#21115 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2017.

Judgments citing CIT v. Kapil Jain

M/S. EON AUTO INDUSTIRES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3179/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rachna Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 127Section 127(2)Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…risdictional issue and point of jurisdiction cannot be challenged by the assessee after completion of the assessment and in support of this proposition, she relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kapil Jain reported in 50 DTR 342 (Delhi), wherein the Hon'ble High Court has taken note of section 124(3) on such matters. On the issue of assessee’s submission with respect to the contention that assessment year 2008-09 will fall within six assessment 7 I.T.A. No.3179/DEL/2013 years pertaining to assessment covered under section 153C r.w.s. 153A and not to be reckoned as year…

M/S. CHITRAKOOT MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 6802/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Naveen Chandra, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153CSection 68

…notice and assessee complied with the notices and questionnaires issued during assessment proceedings. No objection on the jurisdiction was ever raised by the assessee before the assessing officer. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kapil Jain 50 DTR 342 vide order dated 05.08.2010 held that "We are in quite agreement with the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the Revenue. Subs. (3) of s. 124 of the Act puts a specific embargo on the assessee from raising objection about the jurisdiction of an AO after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with notic…

M/S. CHITRAKOOT MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 6801/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Naveen Chandra, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153CSection 68

…notice and assessee complied with the notices and questionnaires issued during assessment proceedings. No objection on the jurisdiction was ever raised by the assessee before the assessing officer. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kapil Jain 50 DTR 342 vide order dated 05.08.2010 held that "We are in quite agreement with the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the Revenue. Subs. (3) of s. 124 of the Act puts a specific embargo on the assessee from raising objection about the jurisdiction of an AO after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with notic…

M/S CHANDRIKA INVESTMENTS vs. ITO,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 631/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-III
Section 119Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 158B

…DCIT or ACIT and in reply, ld. AR of the assessee had nothing to say. As against this, the 3 ITA Nos.631 & 873(B)2013 ld. DR of the revenue placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs Kapil Jain reported in 50 DTR 342(Del.) in support of his contention that if no objection has been raised by the assessee regarding the jurisdiction of the AO within one month after completion of the assessment then the assessee cannot raise such objection afterwards. He also supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) wherein he has given a finding that the CBDT Instruction No.1/20…

CIT v. Kapil Jain (50 DTR 342) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax