CIT v. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh

203 ITR 5Reported decision#15261 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing CIT v. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7129/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…of his arguments, relied upon the following judgments. i) ITO vs. Ramalingeswara Commercial Complex and ANR. (2016) 47 CCH 0052 Vishakhapatnam Tribunal ii) ACIT vs. Lala Murari Lal and Sons (2004) 2 SIT 543 (Luck) iii) CIT vs. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh (203 ITR 5) iv) CIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Limited (2562 ITR 260) v) Bombay Conductors & Electricals Limited vs. OCIT 56 TT J(Ahd) 580 vi) CIT vs. Govind Kumar 119 Taxman 110 (Raj) vii) Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. vs. OCIT 61 ITO 227 (Pune) viii) ITO vs. Arnar Nath Shivraj (HUF);1 SOT 346 (Agra) ITA Nos.7124 to 7129/Mum/2016 52 M/s Galaxy Premises Pvt. Lt…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7128/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…of his arguments, relied upon the following judgments. i) ITO vs. Ramalingeswara Commercial Complex and ANR. (2016) 47 CCH 0052 Vishakhapatnam Tribunal ii) ACIT vs. Lala Murari Lal and Sons (2004) 2 SIT 543 (Luck) iii) CIT vs. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh (203 ITR 5) iv) CIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Limited (2562 ITR 260) v) Bombay Conductors & Electricals Limited vs. OCIT 56 TT J(Ahd) 580 vi) CIT vs. Govind Kumar 119 Taxman 110 (Raj) vii) Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. vs. OCIT 61 ITO 227 (Pune) viii) ITO vs. Arnar Nath Shivraj (HUF);1 SOT 346 (Agra) ITA Nos.7124 to 7129/Mum/2016 52 M/s Galaxy Premises Pvt. Lt…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7127/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…of his arguments, relied upon the following judgments. i) ITO vs. Ramalingeswara Commercial Complex and ANR. (2016) 47 CCH 0052 Vishakhapatnam Tribunal ii) ACIT vs. Lala Murari Lal and Sons (2004) 2 SIT 543 (Luck) iii) CIT vs. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh (203 ITR 5) iv) CIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Limited (2562 ITR 260) v) Bombay Conductors & Electricals Limited vs. OCIT 56 TT J(Ahd) 580 vi) CIT vs. Govind Kumar 119 Taxman 110 (Raj) vii) Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. vs. OCIT 61 ITO 227 (Pune) viii) ITO vs. Arnar Nath Shivraj (HUF);1 SOT 346 (Agra) ITA Nos.7124 to 7129/Mum/2016 52 M/s Galaxy Premises Pvt. Lt…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7126/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…of his arguments, relied upon the following judgments. i) ITO vs. Ramalingeswara Commercial Complex and ANR. (2016) 47 CCH 0052 Vishakhapatnam Tribunal ii) ACIT vs. Lala Murari Lal and Sons (2004) 2 SIT 543 (Luck) iii) CIT vs. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh (203 ITR 5) iv) CIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Limited (2562 ITR 260) v) Bombay Conductors & Electricals Limited vs. OCIT 56 TT J(Ahd) 580 vi) CIT vs. Govind Kumar 119 Taxman 110 (Raj) vii) Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. vs. OCIT 61 ITO 227 (Pune) viii) ITO vs. Arnar Nath Shivraj (HUF);1 SOT 346 (Agra) ITA Nos.7124 to 7129/Mum/2016 52 M/s Galaxy Premises Pvt. Lt…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7125/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…of his arguments, relied upon the following judgments. i) ITO vs. Ramalingeswara Commercial Complex and ANR. (2016) 47 CCH 0052 Vishakhapatnam Tribunal ii) ACIT vs. Lala Murari Lal and Sons (2004) 2 SIT 543 (Luck) iii) CIT vs. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh (203 ITR 5) iv) CIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Limited (2562 ITR 260) v) Bombay Conductors & Electricals Limited vs. OCIT 56 TT J(Ahd) 580 vi) CIT vs. Govind Kumar 119 Taxman 110 (Raj) vii) Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. vs. OCIT 61 ITO 227 (Pune) viii) ITO vs. Arnar Nath Shivraj (HUF);1 SOT 346 (Agra) ITA Nos.7124 to 7129/Mum/2016 52 M/s Galaxy Premises Pvt. Lt…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7124/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…of his arguments, relied upon the following judgments. i) ITO vs. Ramalingeswara Commercial Complex and ANR. (2016) 47 CCH 0052 Vishakhapatnam Tribunal ii) ACIT vs. Lala Murari Lal and Sons (2004) 2 SIT 543 (Luck) iii) CIT vs. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh (203 ITR 5) iv) CIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Limited (2562 ITR 260) v) Bombay Conductors & Electricals Limited vs. OCIT 56 TT J(Ahd) 580 vi) CIT vs. Govind Kumar 119 Taxman 110 (Raj) vii) Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. vs. OCIT 61 ITO 227 (Pune) viii) ITO vs. Arnar Nath Shivraj (HUF);1 SOT 346 (Agra) ITA Nos.7124 to 7129/Mum/2016 52 M/s Galaxy Premises Pvt. Lt…

CIT v. Natvarlal Purshottamdas Parekh (203 ITR 5) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax