CIT v. Rakesh Nain Trivedi CIT Vs. Narpat Singh Malkhan

128 ITR 77High Court1980#18936 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT v. Rakesh Nain Trivedi CIT Vs. Narpat Singh Malkhan

Sri Aditya Homes Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 231/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Sri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

…CRK Swamy reported ACWT Vs. Nathoolal Balaram in (2002) 254 ITR 158 (Mad.) (1980) 125 ITR 596 (MP) Judgment of P&H High Court in Judgment of MP High Court in CIT Vs. Rakesh Nain Trivedi CIT Vs. Narpat Singh Malkhan reported in (2016) 282 CTR 205 Singh (1980) 128 ITR 77 (MP) (P&H) Order of ITAT Jaipur Bench in Judgment of Allahabad High Harish Jain Vs. PCIT reported Court in Associated Contractors in (2023) 221 TTJ 276 (JP) Corp Vs. CIT (2005) 275 ITR 123 (All) 13. On the other hand, ld. DR submitted that the issue of whether the ld.PCIT can invoke jurisdiction or not, is supported by various High Courts. He rel…

Sri Aditya Homes Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 230/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Sri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

…CRK Swamy reported ACWT Vs. Nathoolal Balaram in (2002) 254 ITR 158 (Mad.) (1980) 125 ITR 596 (MP) Judgment of P&H High Court in Judgment of MP High Court in CIT Vs. Rakesh Nain Trivedi CIT Vs. Narpat Singh Malkhan reported in (2016) 282 CTR 205 Singh (1980) 128 ITR 77 (MP) (P&H) Order of ITAT Jaipur Bench in Judgment of Allahabad High Harish Jain Vs. PCIT reported Court in Associated Contractors in (2023) 221 TTJ 276 (JP) Corp Vs. CIT (2005) 275 ITR 123 (All) 13. On the other hand, ld. DR submitted that the issue of whether the ld.PCIT can invoke jurisdiction or not, is supported by various High Courts. He rel…

Aalidhara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd, Surat vs. PCIT-1, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/SRT/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.94/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Alidhara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit-1, Surat. Plot No.168, Udhyog Nagar Road, Udhna, Surat -394210. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacd8469M (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…the doctrine of merger will apply. The logic underlying the doctrine of merger is that there cannot be more than one decree or operative order governing the same subject-matter at a given point of time. In the case of CIT vs. Narpat Singh Malkhan Singh (1981) 128 ITR 77 (MP), the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court has very illustratively considered the doctrine of merger. In this case, the Income Tax Officer (ITO) had completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act against which the assessee preferred an appeal before the AAC confining his objections to certain disallowances of expenses by the ITO. The AAC partly a…

M/S. Oscar Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 7, New Delhi

ITA 2823/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshram/S. Oscar Investments Ltd. Vs. Pr. Cit-7 54, Janpath, New Delhi. Connaught Place New Delhi 110 001 Pan Aaaco1722C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 3Section 43B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Oscar Investments Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT-7 54, Janpath, New Delhi. Connaught Place New Delhi 110 001 PAN AAACO1722C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Assessee by: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department by : Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 15/10/2019 Date of 04/11/2019 pronouncement O R D E R PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against order dated 7th March, 2016 passed by the Ld. Pr. Commission…

CIT v. Rakesh Nain Trivedi CIT Vs. Narpat Singh Malkhan (128 ITR 77) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax