CIT v. Venkateswara Rao

232 Taxmann 123Reported decision#13798 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 350,364 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Venkateswara Rao

Jaybhole Cold Storage, Aravali vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 152/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri D. K. Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.152/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Jaybhole Cold Storage, Vs. Principal Commissioner of Survey No. 742/744, Dehgam Income Tax-1, Bayad Road, Village Chhapariya, Ahmedabad Post: Vasani-Rel, Taluka Bayad, Dist: Aravali-383325 [PAN No.AALFJ9918M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.151/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shreeji Cold Storage, Vs. Principal Commissioner of Survey No. 742/7, Dehgam Bayad Income Tax-1, Road, Village Chhapariya…

Shreeji Cold Storage, Aravali vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 151/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri D. K. Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.152/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Jaybhole Cold Storage, Vs. Principal Commissioner of Survey No. 742/744, Dehgam Income Tax-1, Bayad Road, Village Chhapariya, Ahmedabad Post: Vasani-Rel, Taluka Bayad, Dist: Aravali-383325 [PAN No.AALFJ9918M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.151/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shreeji Cold Storage, Vs. Principal Commissioner of Survey No. 742/7, Dehgam Bayad Income Tax-1, Road, Village Chhapariya…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tuni vs. Mk Aqua Hatchery, Thondangi(M)

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 436/VIZ/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.436/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2015-16) Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S M.K.Aqua Hatchery Ward-1 D.No.3-36, Chintakayalapeta Tuni Thondangi (M) E.G.Dist. [Pan :Aazfm0955H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Smt.Suman Malik, Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri D.S.Sunder Singh: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Rajamahendravaram In Itano.10128/2017-18/Ito,W-1,Tuni/Vsp/2018-19 Dated 21.03.2019 For The Assessment Year(A.Y.)2015-16 With The Delay Of 17 Days. The Assessing Officer Filed The Condonation Petition Giving Administrative Reasons For Delay. The Ld.Ar Expressed No Objection For Condoning The Delay. Therefore, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted.

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Malik, DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR
Section 68

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणमपीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (through web-based video conferencing platform) श्री एन के चौिरी,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.436/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2015-16) Income Tax Officer Vs. M/s M.K.Aqua Hatchery Ward-1 D.No.3-36, Chintakayalapeta Tuni Thondangi (M) E.G.Dist. [PAN :AAZFM0955H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Smt.Sum…

ITO, Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam vs. Gowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 392/VIZ/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble & M/S. Gowthami Builders, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ito, Ward-1(4), Vs. M/S. Gowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam. D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 68

…t is not correct to assess these amounts in the hands of the firm. It would be more appropriate to consider these amounts in the hands of the respective partner. On identical facts, the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs Venkateswara Rao (232 Taxmann 123) held that the amounts received by the firm from its partners cannot be assessed in the hands of the firm though they may be assessed in the hands of the individual partners. The relevant extract of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court is reproduced hereunder:- Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if assessee fails to explain the na…

The ITO, Visakhapatnam vs. M/S. Gowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 314/VIZ/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble & M/S. Gowthami Builders, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ito, Ward-1(4), Vs. M/S. Gowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam. D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 68

…t is not correct to assess these amounts in the hands of the firm. It would be more appropriate to consider these amounts in the hands of the respective partner. On identical facts, the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs Venkateswara Rao (232 Taxmann 123) held that the amounts received by the firm from its partners cannot be assessed in the hands of the firm though they may be assessed in the hands of the individual partners. The relevant extract of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court is reproduced hereunder:- Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if assessee fails to explain the na…

Gowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam vs. The ITO, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 247/VIZ/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble & M/S. Gowthami Builders, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ito, Ward-1(4), Vs. M/S. Gowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam. D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 68

…t is not correct to assess these amounts in the hands of the firm. It would be more appropriate to consider these amounts in the hands of the respective partner. On identical facts, the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs Venkateswara Rao (232 Taxmann 123) held that the amounts received by the firm from its partners cannot be assessed in the hands of the firm though they may be assessed in the hands of the individual partners. The relevant extract of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court is reproduced hereunder:- Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if assessee fails to explain the na…

M/S. Cowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam vs. The ITO, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 323/VIZ/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble & M/S. Gowthami Builders, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ito, Ward-1(4), Vs. M/S. Gowthami Builders, Visakhapatnam. D.No. 48-3-6, Srinagar, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaifg 6738 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 68

…t is not correct to assess these amounts in the hands of the firm. It would be more appropriate to consider these amounts in the hands of the respective partner. On identical facts, the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs Venkateswara Rao (232 Taxmann 123) held that the amounts received by the firm from its partners cannot be assessed in the hands of the firm though they may be assessed in the hands of the individual partners. The relevant extract of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court is reproduced hereunder:- Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if assessee fails to explain the na…

CIT v. Venkateswara Rao (232 Taxmann 123) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax