CIT v. Neo Polypack Pvt. Ltd.

289 ITR 318High Court2007#5498 most cited
21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT v. Neo Polypack Pvt. Ltd.

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. S D MATERIAL HANDLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.499/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S S D Material Handlers Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat Vs. 405-408, Shivalik Western, L.P. Room No.612, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Savani Road, Adajan Adajan Bhavan, Near Majura Gate, Bo, Surat-395009 Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccd 3481B (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

…d by the Delhi High Court in the following judgments : (1) DIT (Exemption) v. Apparel Exports Promotion Council [2000] 112 Taxman 390/244 ITR 734; (2) CIT v. Neo Poly Pack (P.) Ltd. [2000] 112 Taxman 363/245 ITR 492; (3) CIT v. Allied Finance (P.) Ltd. [2007] 289 ITR 318. 27. In the first of the above judgements, it was held that although the doctrine of res judicata did not strictly apply to the income-tax proceedings, yet in order to maintain consistency, the Revenue cannot be permitted to rake up stale issues all over again merely because the scope of appeal is wider than the scope of reference. In this case,…

ACIT 21(1), MUMBAI vs. NAILESH P. DALAL, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6169/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit-21(1), Shri Nailesh Dalal, 6Th Floor, C-10, 5-6, Viram, 62, बनाम/ Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Hatkesh Society, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, N. S. Road No.8, Bandra (East) Jvpd Scheme, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400049 (राज"व /Revenue ) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aacpd9844N Cross Objection No.49/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.6169/Mum/2014) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Nailesh Dalal, Acit-21(1), 5-6, Viram, 62, 6Th Floor, C-10, बनाम/ Hatkesh Society, Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Vs. N. S. Road No.8, Bandra Kurla Complex, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400049 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue ) Pan. No.Aacpd9844N

…ton Textile Mills Ltd : IT Appeal No. 264 of 2007 Pg 76.77 e) DIT vs. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital Society IT Appeal No.28/2006 Pg 78-79 f) CIT vs. Dalmia Promoters Developers: ITAppeal.No.755 of 2005 Pg 8041 g) CWT vs: Allied Finance (P) Ltd. (2007) 289 ITR 318(Del) Pg 82- 83 h) CIT vs. Sood harvester (2008) 304 ITR 279 Pg 84-85 i) Pukhraj Rikhabdass vs. CWT: (1995) 203 ITR 770 (Raj) Pg 86-87 j) CIT V India Forge & Drop Stamping Ltd. (1999) 240 ITR (Mad) Pg 88-89 vi) That the appellant has been assessed to tax u/s 143(3) in the proceeding assessment year i.e. assessment years 2004-05 wherein the sh…

Showing 120 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Neo Polypack Pvt. Ltd. (289 ITR 318) — Cited in 21 Judgments | BharatTax