How many judgments cite CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd.?

149 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. (309 ITR 67), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 263, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 139(1), Section 153A, Section 131.

CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd.

309 ITR 67High Court2009#670 most cited

What is CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. authority for?

An assessment order is not erroneous or prejudicial under Section 263 merely because it is silent on a claim or lacks explicit reasons for its acceptance. Revision under Section 263 is impermissible if the Assessing Officer has taken a plausible view, even if the PCIT holds a different opinion.

149

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works · section 263 · section 143(3) · assessment order erroneous · prejudicial to revenue · revision u/s 263 · lack of inquiry · silence of assessment order · AO's plausible view · Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd.

Also reported as

182 Taxmann 183

Sections most often in play

Section 263 Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 139(1)Section 153A Section 131 Section 132 Section 143

Issues it is cited on

section 263(1)malabar industrial assessment order erroneous revision u/s 263 erroneous and prejudicial lack of enquiry kelvinator section 263 section 26 revenue expenditure section 254(1)capital expenditure

Judgments citing CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd.

GUJARAT STATE COOPERATIVE COTTON FEDERATION LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD -1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 538/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2018-19 Gujarat State The PCIT, Cooperative Cotton Ahmedabad-1 Federation Ltd., Vs (Respondent) ‘A’ Block, Silver Arc, Behind Town Hall, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006 PAN: AAAAG0399P (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Manish J. Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, AR.s Revenue by: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 17-12-2025 Date of pronouncement : 19-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 14-…

CHOKSI RANCHHODLAL KISHORDAS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 558/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: us, A.Y. 2013-14, in the case of the assessee. According to the Ld. PCIT, the reasons for which the case of the assessee was reopened was not properly inquired into by the AO and, therefore, the assessment order, according to him, was erroneous causing prejudice to the Revenue for not having made any addition on account of income which was believed to have escaped assessment in the case of the assessee. The reopening, it transpires, was resorted to on finding that the assessee had received

For Appellant: Shri Rushin Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 558/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) बनाम/ Choksi Ranchhodlal Principal Commissioner Kishordas of Income Tax Vs. 2219/1, Manekchowk, Opp. Ahmedabad-1, Police Chowki, Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad Gujarat – 380001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACFC1913A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Rushin Patel, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Rignesh Das, CIT.DR Date of Hearing 17/12/2025 09/02/2026…

MOHMEDAMIN MOHMEDUMAR GENERAL,SURAT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 522/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

…isions in cases of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. (supra), CIT vs. Kwality Steel Supplies Complex, 84 ITA No.522/SRT/2025/AY 2018-19 Mohmedamin Mohmedmar General . taxmann.com 243 (SC), CIT vs. Arvind Jewellers (supra), CIT vs. Nirma Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd., 309 ITR 67 (Guj.). 5. On the other hand, Ld. CIT–DR has strongly relied on the order passed by ld. PCIT. He has stated that ld. PCIT has called for the records and duly examined it including the assessment order passed u/s 143 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. He has also referred to provisions of section 263 of the Act and stated that the present case is covered by…

SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CEN. CIR-2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 513/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr-DR

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 234B

…s assumed that he has gone through the contents of those documents and has verified the same. It may be that the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act is silent on this aspect but as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Nirma Chemical Works 309 ITR 67 that if the assessment order were to incorporate reasons for upholding the claim made by an assessee, result would be an epitome and not an assessment order. 10. For the sake of conclusiveness, we have examined each and every sale deed which was filed by the Revenue in its paper book with details of transaction filed by the assessee during the cou…

CEIGALL INDIA LIMITED, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 540/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Tarundeep Kaur, CIT, DR(Virtual)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीयअिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM &SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 540/Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 CEIGALL INDIA LIMITED बनाम The Pr. CIT A-898, Tagore Nagar, Ludhiana H.O Ludhiana Ludhiana (East), Punjab-141001 "ायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AADCC0088N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Tarundeep Kaur, C…

AUGMONT ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 3096/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shriom Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanaugmont Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Acit Circle-6(1)(2), 201, A/B & 202, 2Nd Floor, Trade Vs. R. No. 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar World, D-Wing, Kamala Mills Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Compound, S. B. Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400 003. Pan: Aagcr3007D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ld. Ar Department Represented By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld. Dr Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)Section 41Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRIOM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Augmont Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. ACIT Circle-6(1)(2), 201, A/B & 202, 2nd Floor, Trade Vs. R. No. 506, 5th floor, Aayakar World, D-Wing, Kamala Mills Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Compound, S. B. Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400 003. PAN: AAGCR3007D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ld. AR Department Represented by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld. DR Date of conclusion of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025 O R D E R…

CHEMICAL PROCESS PIPING PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 2953/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shriom Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanm/S. Chemical Process Piping Pcit, Mumbai-6, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. R. No. 501, Aayakar Bhavan, Ground Floor, Cpe Plot, B.S.D. Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 Govandi, Mumbai-400 088 020 Pan: Aaccc6212D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Nishit Gandhi & Shri Harshad Shah, Ld. Ars Department Represented By : Shri R. A. Dhyani, Ld. Dr Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 12.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRIOM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Chemical Process Piping PCIT, Mumbai-6, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. R. No. 501, Aayakar Bhavan, Ground Floor, CPE Plot, B.S.D. Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 Govandi, Mumbai-400 088 020 PAN: AACCC6212D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Nishit Gandhi & Shri Harshad Shah, Ld. ARs Department Represented by : Shri R. A. Dhyani, Ld. DR Date of conclusion of Hearing : 12.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025 O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.): 1. Thi…

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI,TALIPARAMBA vs. DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 345/COCH/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ITA Nos. 340 to 345/Coch/2025 (AYs : 2018-19 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) 1. Keeran Muhammed Basheer, ..... Appellants Darussalam Onaparamba Pariyaram, Kannur [PAN: ATJPM 7537 Q] 2. Kodiyil Muhammed Madani Partner, ABC Sales Corporation Taliparamba, Kerala [PAN : AHTPM 7666 E] vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ..... Respondent Central Circle-1, Kozhikoe. Appellant by: ------- None ------- Respondent by: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 13.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 04.08.2025 O R D E R Per: I…

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI,TALIPARAMBA vs. DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 344/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI,TALIPARAMBA vs. DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 343/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI,TALIPARAMBA vs. DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 342/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI,TALIPARAMBA vs. DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 341/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

KEERAN MUHAMMED BASHEER,KANNUR vs. DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 340/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

PASHUPATI CAPITAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI - 4, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above\nterms

ITA 2985/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Section 135Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80G

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nMUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n&\nSHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA NO. 2985/MUM/2025(A.Y: 2020-21)\nM/s. Pashupati Capital Services Pvt. Ltd.\nPCIT, Mumbai-4,\n806, DLH Park NR. MTNL Tele, SV\nRoad, Goregaon West, Maharashtra-\n400 104\nVs. R. No. 629, 6th floor,Aayakar\nBhavan, M. K. Road,\nMumbai-400 020\nPAN: AACCP0795J\n(Appellant)\n(Respondent)\nAssessee Represented by\n: Ms. Vinita Shah, Ld. AR\nDepartment Represented by\n: Shri R. A. Dhyani, Ld. DR\nDate of conclusion of Hearing\n: 24.06.2025\nDa…

SATISHBHAI MOHANBHAI ZALAVADIA,NA vs. ARI,VS.THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT

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

ITA 122/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. A.L. Saini, Am & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.122/Rjt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical He Aring) Satishbhai Mohanbhai Zalavadia, The Pr. Cit – 1, Vs. 2622, Sarvoday Park, Khundh Rajkot Khundh, Chikhli, Navsari - 396521 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acnpp0527F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ar Respondent By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : Heard On 23/07/2024 & Refix For Clarification On 24.04.2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Singhal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. A.L. SAINI, AM & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.122/RJT/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical He aring) Satishbhai Mohanbhai Zalavadia, The Pr. CIT – 1, Vs. 2622, Sarvoday Park, Khundh Rajkot Khundh, Chikhli, Navsari - 396521 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACNPP0527F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Rajendra Singhal, AR Respondent by : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : Heard on 23/07/2024 & Refix for clarification on 24.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E…

BHARATKUMAR RANCHODBHAI SONI,NA vs. ARIVS.PCIT, VALSAD

ITA 505/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

…ree, it cannot be said that the order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. For this, the Id. AR relied on the decision in case of Aryan Arcade Ltd. vs. PCIT, 412 ITR 277 (Guj.) and CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt. Ltd., 309 ITR 67 (Guj.). The Id. AR also relied on the decisions in case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. (supa) and Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (supra). He also relied on the decision of ITAT, Surat in case of K. N. Diamond vs. PCIT, in ITA No. 104/SRT/2022, where the Tribunal held that if the AO has taken a view, which is not unsustainable in law, merely because the Id. PCI…

M/S. BLUERAY TRADING PVT LTD.,MAHARASTRA vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 219/AHD/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri K C Thaker, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 68

…inciple of merger and avoids any conflict of opinion between two quasi judicial authorities of the same rank. This issue has been considered at length by Division Bench of this Court in case of CIT v. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd. [2009] 182 taxmann.com 183/309 ITR 67 (Guj). It was held as under: "20. The stand of the revenue that the assessment order was silent as regards eligibility or otherwise of section 80-I of the Act cannot thus be accepted. As noted hereinbefore the entire section lays down a complete codified scheme in itself for deciding not only the eligibility but also for the computation of the rel…

DCIT, CC-I, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH vs. VALCO INDUSTRIES LTD., , CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 574/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon'Ble Punjab & Haryana High Court? Ii) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Is Right Holding Such Consequential Order As Void An Initio Ignoring The Facts That Order Passed By Ld. Pcit (Central), Gurugram U/S 263 Has Not Attained Its Finality? Iii) Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Right In Holding That Consequential Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 263 Of The Act As Void As Initio Without Giving Any Liberty To The Revenue To Revive The Proceedings Consequent To Any Directions Or Order

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी िव"म िसंह यादव, लेखा सद" एवं "ी परेश म. जोशी, "ाियक सद" BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM & SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO.574/Chd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The DCIT बनाम Valco Industries Ltd. CC-1, Chandigarh SR-37, Sector-26, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh- 160019 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACV5195J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bans…

M/S RANA & JOSHI BUILDTECH P LTD,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Rana & Joshi Buildtech Pr. Cit-1 Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal (Formerly Known As M/S Rana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. ) Vs. 218 Civil Lines, Below Dainik Bhaskar Office Vidisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aafcr9858P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26 .09.2024

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271E

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Rana & Joshi Buildtech Pr. CIT-1 Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal (formerly known as M/s Rana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. ) Vs. 218 Civil Lines, Below Dainik Bhaskar Office Vidisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AAFCR9858P Assessee by Shri S.N. Agrawal AR Revenue by Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 11.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement 26 .09.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM : This appeal by assessee is directed against…

SMT. SHARDA,HARSUD, KHANDWA vs. THE PCIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of the assesse in ITANo

ITA 263/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Premnarayan Pcit (1) 31, Somgaon Khurd, Aaykar Bhawan Harsud, Vs. Indore Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cjzpp1164J Smt. Sharda Pcit (1) A/45, Naya Harsud, Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Khandwa Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Fdxps2997P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2024

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 263Section 54B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Shri Premnarayan PCIT (1) 31, Somgaon Khurd, Aaykar Bhawan Harsud, Vs. Indore Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: CJZPP1164J Smt. Sharda PCIT (1) A/45, Naya Harsud, Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Khandwa Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: FDXPS2997P Assessee by Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, ARs Revenue by Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 21.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement 30.08.2024 O R D…

Showing 1–20 of 149 · Page 1 of 8

...