CIT v. Navichandra & Co.

42 Taxmann.com 28High Court2014#20829 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing CIT v. Navichandra & Co.

Af-Taab Investment Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst.C.I.T. Cir.2(1), Mumbai

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 6913/MUM/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P. P. Bhatt & Hon’Ble Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6913/Mum/2012 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2002-03)

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 27lSection 73

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE P. P. BHATT, PRESIDENT & HON’BLE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6913/Mum/2012 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Af-taab Investment ACIT Circle -2(1), Company Ltd. R. No. 561, Aayakar बिधम/ Bhavan, M. K. Road, Corporate Centre, B- Mumbai-400 020 Block, 34, Sant Tukaram Vs. Road, Carnac Bun, Mumbai-400 009 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AAACA4800H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri P. J. Pardiwala & Ms. Zalak P. Shah, AR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Brajendr…

M/S Keval ( India ) Ltd, Indore vs. DCIT-R-1 (1), Indore

In the result both the appeals of the assessee ITA No

ITA 653/IND/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 14ASection 153Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 43(5)

…ACIT. ITA No.160/Ahd/2013(Ahmedabad ITAT) ii) CIT vs. Aurica Investment & Securities Ltd 310 ITR 121 (Del HC) (2009) iii) Krishna Soya Product Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT, Indore ITA No.496/Ind/2015 order dated 28.09.2017 (Indore Bench) iv) CIT Navinchandra & Co (2014) 42 Taxmann.com 28 (Guj) v) EID Perry India Ltd vs. CCT (2000) 117 STC 457 (SC) vi) Dilip N Shroff vs. JCIT (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC) vii) CIT vs Shree Praveen B. Gada (2011) 18 ITJ 65 (MPHC) viii) CIT vs. Amit Jain (2013) 258 ctr 88 (Del HC) ix) CIT vs. Jasvinder Singh Ahuja (2013) 259 CTR 213 (Del HC) Keval (India) Ltd ITA No.652 & 653/Ind/2017 9. Per contra…

M/S Keval (India) Ltd, Indore vs. DCIT-R 1(1), Indore

In the result both the appeals of the assessee ITA No

ITA 652/IND/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 14ASection 153Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 43(5)

…ACIT. ITA No.160/Ahd/2013(Ahmedabad ITAT) ii) CIT vs. Aurica Investment & Securities Ltd 310 ITR 121 (Del HC) (2009) iii) Krishna Soya Product Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT, Indore ITA No.496/Ind/2015 order dated 28.09.2017 (Indore Bench) iv) CIT Navinchandra & Co (2014) 42 Taxmann.com 28 (Guj) v) EID Perry India Ltd vs. CCT (2000) 117 STC 457 (SC) vi) Dilip N Shroff vs. JCIT (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC) vii) CIT vs Shree Praveen B. Gada (2011) 18 ITJ 65 (MPHC) viii) CIT vs. Amit Jain (2013) 258 ctr 88 (Del HC) ix) CIT vs. Jasvinder Singh Ahuja (2013) 259 CTR 213 (Del HC) Keval (India) Ltd ITA No.652 & 653/Ind/2017 9. Per contra…

M/S. Krishna Soya Products Pvt. Ltd, Indore vs. The DCIT Circle 1(1), Indore

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

ITA 496/IND/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43(5)

…s income or has furnished any particulars of income. The mere treatment of the business loss as a speculation loss by the AO does not automatically warrant any concealment of income and particulars. Similarly in the case of CIT V Navinchandra & Co. (2014) 42 Taxmann.com 28 (Guj) it was held that where the assessee treated the loss from derivative transactions as normal business loss, the AO treated it as speculative in nature and therefore disallowed the same. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) could not be (2014) 42 Taxmann.com 258 (Kar) wherein the claim made by the assessee u/s 80I was legal and valid. Subject to ver…

CIT v. Navichandra & Co. (42 Taxmann.com 28) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax