CWT v. Apar Limited

175 CTR 312High Court2002#23132 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing CWT v. Apar Limited

Rekha Shekhawat, Kota vs. Pr.CIT, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7/JPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanajy Dhariwal, CIT

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271A

…ability of appeal-Scope-Denial of liability by assessee within the meaning of S.246(1)(c)-Has wide import and such denial may be by way of appeal-It is not necessary that assessee should have denied liability in return itself 9.1.2 CIT vs. Apar Limited (2002) 175 CTR 312 (Bombay), wherein it was held that: "Appeal [CWT(A) Maintainability of appeal-Intimation under s. 16(1)(a)(i) Return filed under protest-Thereby assessee disputed his very liability to wealth-tax-AO could not have foreclosed assessee's right to appeal by issue of intimation under s.16(1)(a)(i)-Appeal maintainable under s. 23(1A)(a)" 9.1.3 Mayank…

Ramesh Chand Bansal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Ajmer

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 398/JPR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena, JCIT - DR

Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 139Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…hat no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law. Acquiescence cannot take away from a party the relief that he is entitled to where the tax is levied or collected without authority of law”. The same High Court in CWT vs. Apar Limited (2002) 175 CTR 312 maintained the right of appeal when return was filed under protest, without prejudice to its legal rights as according to the assessee the disputed asset was not chargeable to tax. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Mayank Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO (2003) 181 CTR 362 permitted an appeal when the assessee had included certain asset in his return under…

Design Core, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 617/JPR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai (DCIT)

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 234BSection 244A(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

…ied or collected except by authority of ITA 617/JP/2014_ 8 M/s Design Core Vs ITO law. Acquiescence cannot take away from a party the relief that he is entitled to where the tax is levied or collected without authority of law”. In CWT v/s Apar Limited (2002) 175 CTR 312(Bom) maintained the right of appeal when return was filed under protest, without prejudice to its legal rights as according to the assessee the disputed asset was not chargeable to tax. In Mayank Poddar (HUF) v/s WTO (2003) 181 CTR 362 (Cal) permitted an appeal when the assessee had included certain asset in his return under mistake, admission or…