CIT Vs Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1(SC), CIT v. Govind Bhai 2 Mamaiya

86 Taxmann.com 103Supreme Court of India2017#18357 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT Vs Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1(SC), CIT v. Govind Bhai 2 Mamaiya

Devaraya Pillai Subramanian, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Salem

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 561/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 561/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year:2017-18 Devaraya Pillai Subramanian, Ito 58A, Sathyamoorthy Street, Vs. Ward – 1(1), Salem – 636 001. Salem. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Aijps-3267-J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, Jcit

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, JCIT
Section 56(2)(viii)

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण,‘ए’न्यायपीठ,चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉजज जॉजज के, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 561/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year:2017-18 Devaraya Pillai Subramanian, ITO 58A, Sathyamoorthy Street, vs. Ward – 1(1), Salem – 636 001. Salem. Tamil Nadu. [PAN: AIJPS-3267-J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/Appellant by : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, JCI…

CIT Vs Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1(SC), CIT v. Govind Bhai 2 Mamaiya (86 Taxmann.com 103) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax