(CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal

99 ITR 143Supreme Court of India1975#11901 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2023.

Judgments citing (CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal

SHAJU NINAN JOHN,ERNAKULAM vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE- INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 688/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Mar 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora (Accountant Member), Shri Sandeep Gosain (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma K, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…n record, and not de hors the same. The law in the matter is well-settled, and toward which we may cite some, as under: Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC) CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC) In Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 28 (SC), it stands clarified that in appreciating facts, they must be considered not in isolation, but by assessing the cumulative effect of all the facts in their setting as a whole. In CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC), it was held that the Tribunal is to deal with and determ…

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1(1), JABALPUR vs. SHRI DEEPAK SINGH BANAFER, JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

ITA 92/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sh. L.L. Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 54B

…ngly, stands decided on the basis of the material on record, taking the entirety of the facts and circumstances thereof into account, as indeed the Tribunal is obliged to, and toward which we may refer to some case law, viz. CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC); CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC); Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC); Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.7 In view of the foregoing, we, setting aside the impugned order, uphold the assessment of capital gains at rs. 248.17 lacs, disallowing the benefit u/s. 54B. 4.8 The agriculture…

SMT. ANURADHA UPADHYAY,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 22/JAB/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

…t‟s issue. That is, cannot be regarded as conclusive of the matter. The Tribunal, as indeed any fact finding authority, has necessarily to go by the material on record, and it‟s findings are to be based on relevant material (CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC); Daulat Ram Rawatmull (supra); Oman Salay Mohammed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC); Dhirajlal Girdhari Lal v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 736 (SC)). We 6 ITA Nos. 19-21/JAB/2017 (A.Ys. 2010-11 to 2012-13) Suresh Kumar Upadhyay & Sons and Ano. v. ITO have already indicated of a much higher workload attending the year-end, which may explain the tim…

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 21/JAB/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

…t‟s issue. That is, cannot be regarded as conclusive of the matter. The Tribunal, as indeed any fact finding authority, has necessarily to go by the material on record, and it‟s findings are to be based on relevant material (CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC); Daulat Ram Rawatmull (supra); Oman Salay Mohammed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC); Dhirajlal Girdhari Lal v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 736 (SC)). We 6 ITA Nos. 19-21/JAB/2017 (A.Ys. 2010-11 to 2012-13) Suresh Kumar Upadhyay & Sons and Ano. v. ITO have already indicated of a much higher workload attending the year-end, which may explain the tim…

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 20/JAB/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

…t‟s issue. That is, cannot be regarded as conclusive of the matter. The Tribunal, as indeed any fact finding authority, has necessarily to go by the material on record, and it‟s findings are to be based on relevant material (CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC); Daulat Ram Rawatmull (supra); Oman Salay Mohammed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC); Dhirajlal Girdhari Lal v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 736 (SC)). We 6 ITA Nos. 19-21/JAB/2017 (A.Ys. 2010-11 to 2012-13) Suresh Kumar Upadhyay & Sons and Ano. v. ITO have already indicated of a much higher workload attending the year-end, which may explain the tim…

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 19/JAB/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

…t‟s issue. That is, cannot be regarded as conclusive of the matter. The Tribunal, as indeed any fact finding authority, has necessarily to go by the material on record, and it‟s findings are to be based on relevant material (CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC); Daulat Ram Rawatmull (supra); Oman Salay Mohammed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC); Dhirajlal Girdhari Lal v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 736 (SC)). We 6 ITA Nos. 19-21/JAB/2017 (A.Ys. 2010-11 to 2012-13) Suresh Kumar Upadhyay & Sons and Ano. v. ITO have already indicated of a much higher workload attending the year-end, which may explain the tim…

M/S.ASIT DIXIT,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD2(2), JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 19/JAB/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Oct 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Bleassessment Year : 2005-06 Asit Dixit, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-2(2), Jabalpur (M.P.) Jabalpur [Pan: Aanfm 5798A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sanjay Seth, Ca Respondent By Sh. S.K. Halder, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement 07/10/2021

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)

…fact no explanation, i.e., in the eyes of law. That adjudication by any authority, including the Tribunal, the final fact-finding body, is to be based on, and with reference to, the material on record, is well-settled (viz. CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC); CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC)). The said credit has, under the circumstances, been rightly regarded by the Revenue as not proved. (b) Rs.37,00,000/- (Sh. Santosh Jaiswal) The source has, again, been ascribed to the creditors’ capital, withdrawn from another partnership firm, Santosh Jaiswal (Ratlam), also a Jabalpur base…

SHRI GULBAHAR SINGH ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DASUYA, DASUYA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 335/ASR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 335/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Kumar (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (SMC) BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 335/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Gulbahar Singh s/o Gurdial vs. Income Tax Officer, Singh [through L/H Dasuya Gursharanjit Kaur, w/o Gulbahar Singh], Proprietor, Parmindera Medicine Centre, Miani Road, Teh. Dasuya, Distt. Hoshiarpur (144205) [PAN: ANAPK 5537B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Vinod Kumar (C.A.) Respondent by: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.) Date of Hearing: 20.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 30.04.2019 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Asses…

LATE SMT. MOHINI PURI THROUGH,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 76/ASR/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 76/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 149

…trikes one is that the assessee’s case is, without doubt, wholly unevidenced. The adjudication by the Tribunal has necessarily to be on the basis of the material on record (CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC); CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC)). There is no document to show that the shop was sold, much less during the relevant year, or in May, 2003, as stated. There is nothing to show that the shop in fact belonged to the assessee’s late son. The subject property is not identified nor indeed the person/s buying the same, or even person/s witnessing the transaction. Rather, if such…

(CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal (99 ITR 143) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax