CIT v. Mohd. Ayyub & Sons Agency

197 ITR 637High Court1992#17097 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2020.

Judgments citing CIT v. Mohd. Ayyub & Sons Agency

Tharif Builders P. Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. Theacit, Kozhikkode

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 489/COCH/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…1) (187 ITR 688) (SC) and Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (229 ITR 383) held that the same will apply to appeal before Tribunal Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mohd. Ayyub & Sons Agency (1992) 197 ITR 637 (All) has held that the power of the Tribunal to permit any party to the appeal to raise the question of jurisdiction, which goes to the root of the matter and does not involve further investigation into facts, cannot be disputed on the plain reading of r. 11 of the ITAT Rules, 1963. Indeed, on such a plea being taken, the Tribunal is under a st…

Tharif Builders P. Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. Theacit, Kozhikkode

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 488/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…1) (187 ITR 688) (SC) and Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (229 ITR 383) held that the same will apply to appeal before Tribunal Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mohd. Ayyub & Sons Agency (1992) 197 ITR 637 (All) has held that the power of the Tribunal to permit any party to the appeal to raise the question of jurisdiction, which goes to the root of the matter and does not involve further investigation into facts, cannot be disputed on the plain reading of r. 11 of the ITAT Rules, 1963. Indeed, on such a plea being taken, the Tribunal is under a st…

Tharif Builders P. Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. Theacit, Kozhikkode

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 487/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…1) (187 ITR 688) (SC) and Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (229 ITR 383) held that the same will apply to appeal before Tribunal Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mohd. Ayyub & Sons Agency (1992) 197 ITR 637 (All) has held that the power of the Tribunal to permit any party to the appeal to raise the question of jurisdiction, which goes to the root of the matter and does not involve further investigation into facts, cannot be disputed on the plain reading of r. 11 of the ITAT Rules, 1963. Indeed, on such a plea being taken, the Tribunal is under a st…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Asahi India Glass Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 2183/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Asahi India Glass Limited, Dcit, Circle- 2(1), 38, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. Vs. Phase- Iii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri Sandip Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…ould have disposed of the same on the merits by taking these materials into consideration and there is no need to direct remand. 15. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Mohd. Ayyub and Sons Agency’s case reported in 197 ITR 637, he submitted that when the new issue is raised before the Tribunal and no further investigation is required into the facts of the case, the Tribunal is under a statutory obligation not only to entertain the plea but is also to decide the same after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to either sides. Relying on various other decisi…

M/S. Asahi India Glass Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1637/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Asahi India Glass Limited, Dcit, Circle- 2(1), 38, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. Vs. Phase- Iii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri Sandip Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…ould have disposed of the same on the merits by taking these materials into consideration and there is no need to direct remand. 15. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Mohd. Ayyub and Sons Agency’s case reported in 197 ITR 637, he submitted that when the new issue is raised before the Tribunal and no further investigation is required into the facts of the case, the Tribunal is under a statutory obligation not only to entertain the plea but is also to decide the same after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to either sides. Relying on various other decisi…