D.D. Malijan v. Dy. CIT

91 TTJ 947Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2004#21612 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing D.D. Malijan v. Dy. CIT

DCIT, CC- 8(4), Mumbai vs. Ashok R. Ruia (HUF), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6309/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Shailja Rai
Section 132

…aining jotting of certain figures even if seized from the possession of assessee would not come within the compass of the word 'document' and cannot be the basis for treating certain income as undisclosed income of the assessee. D.D. Malijan V. Dy. CIT [2004] 91 TTJ 947(Del.) • Addition could not be made on the basis of an unnamed loose paper found at the business premises of the husband of the assessee by treating part of the items noted in the said paper as transactions relating to assessee. Smt. Boni manaSwarnaRekha v. AsstLCIT [2005] 147 Taxman 59 (Visakha.) (Mag.) • Dumb documents or documents with no certai…

DCIT Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Rohan Developers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4060/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Gosh, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat, D.R
Section 132(1)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, M/s. Rohan Developers Central Circle-8(4), Pvt. Ltd., Room No.658, 112-122 Hira Bhavan, 6th Floor, Vs. Raja Ram Mohan Roy Aayakar Bhavan, Road, M.K. Road, Prathan Samaj, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400 004 PAN: AACCA7661A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-…

Rohan Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3801/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Gosh, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat, D.R
Section 132(1)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, M/s. Rohan Developers Central Circle-8(4), Pvt. Ltd., Room No.658, 112-122 Hira Bhavan, 6th Floor, Vs. Raja Ram Mohan Roy Aayakar Bhavan, Road, M.K. Road, Prathan Samaj, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400 004 PAN: AACCA7661A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sanjay Taneja, New Delhi

The appeal of the AO are allowed with above direction

ITA 6815/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Sanjay Taneja, Central Circle-18, 198/1, Ramesh Market, New Delhi East Of Kailash, New Delhi Pan: Aaept8805A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Matta, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 14ASection 69A

…s of the following cases: 1. Amar Natvar Lai Shah Vs ACIT (1997) 60ITD 560, 564-565 (Ahd) 2. ACIT Vs Shailesh S Shah (1997) 63 ITD 153 (Bombay) ACIT Vs. Sanjay Taneja 3. Malabar Marketing Company Vs ACIT (2004) 91 TTJ 348 (Mumbai) 4. DD Malhan Vs. DCIT (2004) 91 TTJ 947 (Del) 5. Bansal Strips Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (2006) 99 ITD 177 (Del) 6. CIT Vs Girish Chaudhary (2008) 296ITR 619 (Del) Therefore, this document is nothing but a dumb document in the absence of any other material that was brought on record by the Assessing Officer to show that the appellant made investment in the property or extended loans to other or…

D.D. Malijan v. Dy. CIT (91 TTJ 947) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax