CIT v. Laxmi Rattan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd.

97 ITR 285High Court1974#25954 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT v. Laxmi Rattan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd.

Economic Laws Practice, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)59, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 7146/MUM/2018[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2019AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Vidushi Maheshwari – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh – Ld. DR

Section 201Section 244A(1)Section 3(35)

…e decision in the case of Arvind Mills Limited (supra) was rendered in the context of provisions of Section 244A of the 1961 Act. We have also noted that Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Laxmi Rattan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd., reported in (1974) 97 ITR 285 (All. HC) has also interpreted ‘month’ in context of Section 271(1)(a) of the 1961 Act, by holding as under:- “The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, referred the following two questions for our opinion: "1.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was co…

Shri Kartick Chandra Mondal, Hooghly vs. Principal CIT - 8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Dr. Shri P. K. Srihari, CIT/ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 54Section 54E

…by limitation by six days. It was urged that the period prescribed under s. 256(2) is six months which ought to be taken as 180 days. Learned counsel placed reliance on a decision of this Court in the case of CIT vs. Laxmi Rattan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. (1974) 97 ITR 285, in support of his contention that the limitation should be calculated treating each of the six months as meaning 30 days. We are unable to agree with this contention. The decision cited by learned counsel for the assessee was in the context of s. 271(1)(a) which deals with an entirely different subject. This Court, construing that provision, held…

Uti Mutual Fund, Mumbai vs. DCIT Centralised Processing Cell-TDS, Traces, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 2295/MUM/2018[2014-15 (F.26Q/3RD QTR)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2019

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2295/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Uti Mutual Fund, Dcit, Centralised Gn Block, Uti Tower, Processing Cell-Tds, Bandra Complex, Traces, V. Bandra (E), Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai-400051 Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Up- 201010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaatu1088L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Krupa Gandhi Revenue By: Shri. Rajeev Gubgotra (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being

For Appellant: Ms. Krupa GandhiFor Respondent: Shri. Rajeev Gubgotra (DR)

Section 200ASection 201

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “F” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2295/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ UTI Mutual Fund, DCIT, Centralised GN Block, UTI Tower, Processing Cell-TDS, Bandra Complex, TRACES, v. Bandra (E), Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai-400051 Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, UP- 201010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN: AAATU1088L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: Ms. Krupa Gandhi Revenue by: Shri. Rajeev Gubgotra (DR) सुनवाई की तारी…