CIT v. V.T. Rajenderan

288 ITR 312High Court2007#13927 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2021.

Judgments citing CIT v. V.T. Rajenderan

The ITO, Ward-1, Anand vs. M/S. Devraj Developers, Anand

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1526/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 142ASection 147

…l is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs." Reliance can also be made upon the judgments of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs Darsan Singh [2005] 272 ITR 650 (P & H), the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT Vs V.T. Rajenderan [2007] 288 ITR 312 (Mad) and the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Prakash Chand Vs Dy. CIT [2004] 269 ITR 260 (M.P.) in which it was held that the notice of reassessment on the basis of report of the Valuation Officer is not valid. It was held that DVO's report is only an information and not the material on the basis of which the assessment may be reopened.…

The ITO, Ward-1, Anand vs. M/S. Devraj Developers, Anand

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1525/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 142ASection 147

…l is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs." Reliance can also be made upon the judgments of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs Darsan Singh [2005] 272 ITR 650 (P & H), the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT Vs V.T. Rajenderan [2007] 288 ITR 312 (Mad) and the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Prakash Chand Vs Dy. CIT [2004] 269 ITR 260 (M.P.) in which it was held that the notice of reassessment on the basis of report of the Valuation Officer is not valid. It was held that DVO's report is only an information and not the material on the basis of which the assessment may be reopened.…

The ITO, Ward-1, Anand vs. M/S. Devraj Developers, Anand

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1524/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 142ASection 147

…l is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs." Reliance can also be made upon the judgments of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs Darsan Singh [2005] 272 ITR 650 (P & H), the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT Vs V.T. Rajenderan [2007] 288 ITR 312 (Mad) and the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Prakash Chand Vs Dy. CIT [2004] 269 ITR 260 (M.P.) in which it was held that the notice of reassessment on the basis of report of the Valuation Officer is not valid. It was held that DVO's report is only an information and not the material on the basis of which the assessment may be reopened.…

M/S Hotel Ajuba Residency, Patiala vs. DCIT, Circle, Patiala

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 829/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jan 2020AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudershan, JCIT
Section 133ASection 142A(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…determine the escaped income, therefore reopening of the assessment by the A.O. was not valid. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: 1. Bhola Nath Majumdar V/s Income Tax Officer 221ITR 608 (GAU) 2. Commissioner of Income Tax V/s V T Rajendran 288 ITR 312 (MAD) 3. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Dhariya Construction Company 328 ITR 515 (SC) 4. Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Chohan Resorts 359 ITR 394 (P&H) 5. Sargam Cinema V/s Commissioner of Income Tax 328 ITR 513 (SC) 6. Darshan Buildcon V/s Income Tax Officer 416ITR66(GUJ) 8. In his rival submissions the Ld. Sr. DR strongly supported…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Saidan Kapoor, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4496/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 4496/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs Sh. Saidan Kapoor, J-6, 1St Floor, Ndse, Part-I, Circle-32(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajnpk3289R Assessee By : Sh. Om Prakash, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.01.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Om Prakash, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 55A

…Undoubtedly, it is an opinion by an "expert" but it must be collaborated with some other document to justify the re-assessment order. It is for this reason, that the Division Bench of Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income- tax vs. V.T. Rajendran (2007) 288 ITR 312 (Mad) has held that purely on the basis of DVO's report reassessment order cannot be passed. This Court is in full agreement with the law cited by the assessee in Commissioner of Income-tax Vs V.T. Rajendran (2007) 288 ITR 312 (Mad) and holds that re-assessment order cannot be passed purely on the basis of DVO’s report.” 5.5 In view the facts of…

CIT vs. Ambience Hotels & Resorts Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/581/2012HC Delhi05 Oct 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

…of Ambience Developers Pvt. Ltd. and 3.71% in the case of Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd.) To assail the addition on this basis, the assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. V.T. Rajendran (2007) 288 ITR 312. 6. At the outset, it was pointed out by the learned AR that in group cases of M/s Ambience Developers and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. similar additions were made in respect of assessment years 2003-04 to 2007-08 and the CIT (A) had deleted the addition. The order of the CIT (A) was challenged by the department in the Tribunal and th…

CIT vs. Ambience Hotels & Resorts Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA - 581 / 2012HC Delhi05 Oct 2012

…of Ambience Developers Pvt. Ltd. and 3.71% in the case of Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd.) To assail the addition on this basis, the assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. V.T. Rajendran (2007) 288 ITR 312. 6. At the outset, it was pointed out by the learned AR that in group cases of M/s Ambience Developers and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. similar additions were made in respect of assessment years 2003-04 to 2007-08 and the CIT (A) had deleted the addition. The order of the CIT (A) was challenged by the department in the Tribunal and th…