CIT v. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen

4 DTR 218High Court2008#20739 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. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen

Asstt. CIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. Smt. Joti Suresh Bajoria, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 151/NAG/2018[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Aug 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.151/Nag/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Smt. Jyoti Suresh Bajoria, Commissioner Of Income V 402/403, Jagat Plaza, Law Tax, Circle-1(1), S College Square, Amravati Nagpur. Road, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Abrpb2740G Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Kapil Sharma– Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash Kanojiya – Dr Date Of Hearing 28/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue I.E.Acit, Circle-1(1), Nagpur Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Dated 26.03.2018 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 153A Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Smt. Jyoti Suresh Bajoria [R]

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…dhpur) 2. CIT Vs. Smt. Santosh Jain (2008) 296 ITR 324 (P&H HC) 3. CIT Vs. Gobind Ram (2015) 229 Taxman 491 (P&H HC) 4. PCIT Vs. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P) Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 85 (Rajasthan HC : Jaipur Bench) 5. CIT Vs. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen (2008) 4 DTR 218 (Madras HC) 6. CIT Vs. Purshottamlal Tamrakar Uchehra (2004) 270 ITR 314 (MP HC) 7. CIT Vs. Banwarilal Banshidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (Allahabad HC) 8. Satishkumar Vishnudas Bhutada Vs. ITO (ITAT Pune) 9. Kirtikumar Vishnudas Bhutada Vs. ACIT (ITAT Pune) 10. DCIT Vs. Shri. Narendra Mithailal Agrawal (ITAT Pune) 5. We have heard both the parties and…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3263/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and ShriFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Charudahry, CIT
Section 132

…ect of the purchases. When gross profit rate is applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the AO to make scrutiny of the amount incurred on the purchases by the assessee. 10.4 In the case of CIT vs. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen, (2008) 4 DTR 218 (Mad), the Hon’ble High Court has held that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) should not be applied mechanically and when such disallowances are made, it should not exceed the overall probable percentage of profit. 10.5 In CIT v Smt. Santosh Jain (2008) 296 ITR 32 (P & H) (2007) 159 Taxman 392 (P & H), the Hon’ble High Court held that where the income w…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3262/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and ShriFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Charudahry, CIT
Section 132

…ect of the purchases. When gross profit rate is applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the AO to make scrutiny of the amount incurred on the purchases by the assessee. 10.4 In the case of CIT vs. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen, (2008) 4 DTR 218 (Mad), the Hon’ble High Court has held that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) should not be applied mechanically and when such disallowances are made, it should not exceed the overall probable percentage of profit. 10.5 In CIT v Smt. Santosh Jain (2008) 296 ITR 32 (P & H) (2007) 159 Taxman 392 (P & H), the Hon’ble High Court held that where the income w…

Hetal Ramanlal Shah, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2188/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ram Lal Negi & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 143Section 145Section 145(3)Section 40A(3)Section 40A(3)(a)Section 40A(3)(b)

…are genuine, genuineness of payments of labour charges and purchases stand established, otherwise the assessee would not have received any amount on account of job work/sales. The Hon`ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen [2008] 4 DTR 218 (Mad) categorically held that when disallowance under section 40A(3) is made, the over all income should not exceed probable percentage of profit. The ratio of this decision is directly applicable to the case of the assessee. As the disallowance made by the AO resulted in to abnormal gross profit and net profit rate, which comes to almost hundred p…

CIT v. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen (4 DTR 218) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax