CIT v. Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd.

363 ITR 322High Court2014#12691 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 115besection 256(1)section 256section 80ib(10)project completion methodon money receiptsection 18section 192dumb documentssection 80ibon-moneysection 44a

Judgments citing CIT v. Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Pawan Kumar Jhalani, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 966/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 153CSection 4

…n Kumar v. Commissioner of Income-tax, 7-13 (1978) 115 ITR 524 (SC) Copy of the order of Hon’ble High Court in the case of Commissioner 5. of Income-tax–II v. Leo Formulations P. Ltd., (2014) 48 taxmann.com 14-17 328 (Guj); (2014) 225 Taxman 386 (Guj); (2014) 363 ITR 322 (Guj) Copy of the order of Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Kaizen Enterprises P. 6. 18-28 Ltd. v. ACIT, (2025) 172 taxmann.com 621 (Jaipur - Trib.) Copy of the order of Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Murlidhar Deendayal 7. 29-37 v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 12, Ajmer, ITA No. 329/JP/2016 Copy of the order of Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Nawal Kishore Soni…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Surat vs. Kush Corporation, Surat

In the result, grounds of cross objection raised by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 357/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A No. 93 & 94/Srt /2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2015-16)

Section 133ASection 254(1)

…0/- as mentioned in para 6.6 of his order. The ld. CIT(A) held that as per the order of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs President Industries reported vide 258 ITR 654 and CIT Vs Gurbachan Singh Juneja 302 ITR 63 (Guj) and Neo Formulation Pvt. Ltd. 363 ITR 322 that only profit element to be taxed and not the entire gross receipt of alleged on money. The ld. CIT(A) recorded that profit element in the activities of builders are IT(SS)A No. 93 & 94 & ITA 357/Srt/2022 & CO 01/Srt/2023 ACIT Vs Kush Corporation ranging 8% to 20%. Therefore, by taking the maximum figure at 20%, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the ad…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC, Vapi vs. Poonam Developers LLP, Dadra & Nagar Haveli (Ut)

In the result, these Cross-Objections Nos

ITA 320/SRT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

…fit amount. It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs President Industries reported vide 258 ITR 654 (Guj.), CIT Vs Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja reported vide 302 ITR 63 (Guj.) & CIT Vs Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd. reported vide 363 ITR 322 that only profit element is to be taxed and not the gross receipts.t he same has been held by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad & Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in several cases which has ben cited by the assessee in his submissions, as reproduced above. keeping in view these facts, the Assessing Officer is not justified in making the ads of total gross receipts…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC, Vapi vs. Poonam Developers LLP, Dadra & Nagar Haveli (Ut)

In the result, these Cross-Objections Nos

ITA 319/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

…fit amount. It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs President Industries reported vide 258 ITR 654 (Guj.), CIT Vs Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja reported vide 302 ITR 63 (Guj.) & CIT Vs Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd. reported vide 363 ITR 322 that only profit element is to be taxed and not the gross receipts.t he same has been held by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad & Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in several cases which has ben cited by the assessee in his submissions, as reproduced above. keeping in view these facts, the Assessing Officer is not justified in making the ads of total gross receipts…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC, Vapi vs. Poonam Developers LLP, Dadra & Nagar Haveli (Ut)

In the result, these Cross-Objections Nos

ITA 318/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

…fit amount. It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs President Industries reported vide 258 ITR 654 (Guj.), CIT Vs Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja reported vide 302 ITR 63 (Guj.) & CIT Vs Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd. reported vide 363 ITR 322 that only profit element is to be taxed and not the gross receipts.t he same has been held by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad & Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in several cases which has ben cited by the assessee in his submissions, as reproduced above. keeping in view these facts, the Assessing Officer is not justified in making the ads of total gross receipts…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC, Vapi vs. M/S. M Poonam Developers, Valsad

In the result, these Cross-Objections Nos

ITA 286/SRT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

…fit amount. It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs President Industries reported vide 258 ITR 654 (Guj.), CIT Vs Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja reported vide 302 ITR 63 (Guj.) & CIT Vs Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd. reported vide 363 ITR 322 that only profit element is to be taxed and not the gross receipts.t he same has been held by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad & Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in several cases which has ben cited by the assessee in his submissions, as reproduced above. keeping in view these facts, the Assessing Officer is not justified in making the ads of total gross receipts…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC, Vapi vs. M/S. M Poonam Developers, Valsad

In the result, these Cross-Objections Nos

ITA 285/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

…fit amount. It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs President Industries reported vide 258 ITR 654 (Guj.), CIT Vs Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja reported vide 302 ITR 63 (Guj.) & CIT Vs Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd. reported vide 363 ITR 322 that only profit element is to be taxed and not the gross receipts.t he same has been held by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad & Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in several cases which has ben cited by the assessee in his submissions, as reproduced above. keeping in view these facts, the Assessing Officer is not justified in making the ads of total gross receipts…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC, Vapi vs. M/S. M Poonam Developers, Valsad

In the result, these Cross-Objections Nos

ITA 284/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

…fit amount. It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs President Industries reported vide 258 ITR 654 (Guj.), CIT Vs Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja reported vide 302 ITR 63 (Guj.) & CIT Vs Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd. reported vide 363 ITR 322 that only profit element is to be taxed and not the gross receipts.t he same has been held by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad & Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in several cases which has ben cited by the assessee in his submissions, as reproduced above. keeping in view these facts, the Assessing Officer is not justified in making the ads of total gross receipts…

CIT v. Neo Formulations Pvt. Ltd. (363 ITR 322) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax