Dayabai v. CIT

154 ITR 248High Court1985#5773 most cited
20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Dayabai v. CIT

JAGDISH SHARMA (HUF),JAHANABAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, PATNA

In the result, both the captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 203/PAT/2023[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Feb 2025AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.198 & 203/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 1996-97 & 1999-00 Jagdish Sharma (Huf).…………………………………………..………….……Appellant Korra, Ghoshi, Janhanabad, Bihar-804406. [Pan: Aaihs5678G] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-5, Patna……..….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. V. Pathy, Sr. Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit - Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 18, 2025 Order Per Bench: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 1996-97 & 1999-00. Since, The Issues Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Are Delays Of 26 Days In Filing Both The Present Appeals. The Assessee Submitted Separate Applications For Condonation Of Such Delays Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Applications, We Find Reasonable Cause. We, Therefore, Condone The Delays In Filing Both The Appeals & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals.

Section 250

…ed appeals as the assessee has availed the benefit of VSV scheme before the competent authority in respect of appeals relating to individual capacity for assessment years i.e. 1996-97 & 1999-2000. We also observe that in the case of Smt. Dayabai v. CIT [1985] 154 ITR 248 / 23 Taxman 377 (MP), the Hon’ble High Court observed that once the substantive assessment has been made, the protective assessment cannot survive in appeal. Since, in the instant case, the protective assessment was made in the hands of the HUF, while substantive assessment was made in the hands of actual income earner as individual capacity, the…

JAGDISH SHARMA (HUF),JAHANABAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, PATNA

In the result, both the captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 198/PAT/2023[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Feb 2025AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.198 & 203/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 1996-97 & 1999-00 Jagdish Sharma (Huf).…………………………………………..………….……Appellant Korra, Ghoshi, Janhanabad, Bihar-804406. [Pan: Aaihs5678G] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-5, Patna……..….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. V. Pathy, Sr. Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit - Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 18, 2025 Order Per Bench: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 1996-97 & 1999-00. Since, The Issues Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Are Delays Of 26 Days In Filing Both The Present Appeals. The Assessee Submitted Separate Applications For Condonation Of Such Delays Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Applications, We Find Reasonable Cause. We, Therefore, Condone The Delays In Filing Both The Appeals & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals.

Section 250

…ed appeals as the assessee has availed the benefit of VSV scheme before the competent authority in respect of appeals relating to individual capacity for assessment years i.e. 1996-97 & 1999-2000. We also observe that in the case of Smt. Dayabai v. CIT [1985] 154 ITR 248 / 23 Taxman 377 (MP), the Hon’ble High Court observed that once the substantive assessment has been made, the protective assessment cannot survive in appeal. Since, in the instant case, the protective assessment was made in the hands of the HUF, while substantive assessment was made in the hands of actual income earner as individual capacity, the…