CIT v. United Mercantile Co. (Pvt.) Ltd.

158 ITR 41High Court1986#19324 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT v. United Mercantile Co. (Pvt.) Ltd.

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2486/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

…earlier order. In order to support the said contentions reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements Page No. 62 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd. i) CIT v. United Mercantile Co. (Pvt.) Ltd [158 ITR 41 (Raj)] wherein it was held as under: (Head note) (copy placed at Pgnos 24 to 30 of case law paper book). “………….The Appellate Tribunal found that at the time of original assessment, the Income-tax officer had before him both the decisions of the Supreme Court and full facts, that the assessee and also the Income-tax officer followed the decision in…

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2485/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

Dr. Reddys Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1723/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2007-08 Dr.Reddy’S Laboratories Vs. Dcit,Circle-17(1) Limited Hyderabad 8-2-337, Road No.3 Banjara Hills Hyderabad-500 034

For Appellant: Shri S.P.ChidambaramFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai,CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80I

…(1955) 28ITR 885 (Trav-Coch); RajeshwarPershad Gala) Vs CIT (1955) 28ITR 842 (Pun) it was ruled that, the power conferred by these provisions is a power to correct mistakes and not a power of review. In the case of CIT Vs United Mercantile Co Pvt. Ltd (1986) 158 ITR 41 (Raj); CIT (Addl) Vs Chemical Limes (1984) 149IR 325 (Raj) it was held that under section 154, an assessing officer cannot be permitted to revise or review his earlier order. In the case of CIT Vs Ram Bahadur Thakur Ltd (1999) 237 ITR 217 (Ker) it was held that review cannot be under taken in the guise of rectification. III. Rectification cannot b…

Agro Service Syndicate, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-29(3)), Kolkata

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

ITA 1421/KOL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2005-06 Agro Service Syndicate V/S. Ito, Ward-29(3), C/O A.K.Dutta & Co. Room Aaykar Bhavan No. 207, 2, Church Lane, (Dakshin), 2, Kolkata-01 Gariahat Road (S), [Pan No.Aaffa 3558 C] Kolkata-68 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 254Section 264Section 264(4)Section 264(4)(c)

…ort of his claim as mentioned under : 1. Chiranjilal Daga v. CIT & Anr. (1978) 113 ITR 363 (Mad) 2. Radhey Shyam Subdar Mal v. CIT (1984) 146 ITR 374(All) 3. Lala Rajeshwar Pershad v. CIT (1955) 28 ITR 842 (P&H) 4. CIT v. United Mercantile Co. (P) Ltd. (1986) 158 ITR 41 (Raj) The Ld DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. As per section 264 of the Act the assessee can seek relief against the order of AO by making an application to the Ld. CIT within the prescribed time. The application…