DCIT v. Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg. Ltd.

52 SOT 137Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#25196 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 131 Section 143(3)Section 144C Section 14A Section 16A Section 2(22B)Section 23A Section 24

Judgments citing DCIT v. Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg. Ltd.

Rahil Maheshkumar Nizamuddin, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle 1(2), Blr, Bangalore

ITA 379/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan &For Respondent: Sri Guru Kumar S., D.R

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…(i) Judgement of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore v. Chandrasekaran reported in [2015] 56 taxmann.com 210 (Karnataka), (ii) Order of ITAT Hyderabad in the case of Sunil Kumar Singhania Vs. ACIT reported in (2012) 52 SOT 137 (iii) Order of Tribunal in the case of Tecnotree Convergence Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No.1518/Bang/2017 dated 11.8.2021 for the AY 2009- 10 (iv) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharmendra Textile Processor (212 CTR 432) 2.11 He placed reliance on the parity of reasoning of the unreported decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Tribuna…

Tribhovandas Bhimji Zaveri (Delhi ) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 9, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 24/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm M/S. Tribhovandas Bhimji Zaveri Vs. Dcit Cen Cir 9 (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd., R.No.806, Old Cgo Annex Ground Floor Building, M.K.Road, Somnath Apartments, Ram Mumbai – 400 020 Mandir R.D.Vile Parle (E) Mumbai – 400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aabct0165H Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 171(1)(c)Section 271(1)(c)

…spati Mill Ltd. 303 ITR 53 (P & H) b. C.IT. Vs. RavaitSingh&Co. 254ITR191(P&H) c. CIT Vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading & Rubber lnd.[2014] 360 ITR 580 (Raj.) d. DCIT Vs. Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg. Ltd. [2012J52 SOT 91 (Delhi) e. Sunil Kumar Singhania Vs. ACIT [2012] 52 SOT 137 (Hyderabad) 5. On the other hand, it was contended by learned DR that the Tribunal itself has observed in para 36 that assessee might not have accounted for this transaction in the books of accounts, therefore, to the extent addition has been upheld by the Tribunal, the CIT(A) was justified to restrict the penalty to that extent. 6. We have consid…

ACIT 15(3), Mumbai vs. Tirupati Corporation, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3066/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…spati Mill Ltd. 303 ITR 53 (P & H) b. C.IT. Vs. RavaitSingh&Co. 254ITR191(P&H) c. CIT Vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading & Rubber lnd.[2014] 360 ITR 580 (Raj.) d. DCIT Vs. Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg. Ltd. [2012J52 SOT 91 (Delhi) e. Sunil Kumar Singhania Vs. ACIT [2012] 52 SOT 137 (Hyderabad) 8. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A) for deleting the penalty so imposed. 9. In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 12/01/2018 (PAWAN SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 12/01/2018 Karuna Sr.PS M/s. Tirupati Corporatio…