DCIT v. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao

43 Taxmann.com 205Reported decision#11692 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271econstruction pepenalty under section 271dcorpus fundsection 269ton money receiptsection 53joint development agreementsection 269sjdatrcsection 271e

Judgments citing DCIT v. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 64/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 57/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 56/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 54/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 53/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

D S R INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 51/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 50/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

D S R INFRASTRUCTUREPRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 49/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ecution of civil contract works ü TejaConstrcution vs. ACIT [39 SOT 13, Hyd ITAT] - The assessee was a sub-contractor of the contractor who earned some profit, Therefore the CIT(A) rightly applied net profit rate of 7 per cent. ü DCIT vs. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao [43 Taxmann.com 205, Hyd ITAT] it was held as under: 51. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of M/s C. Eswara Reddy & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 668 (Hyd.) of 2009, dated 31-1-2011]…

SH. GIANI RAM,HARYANA vs. ACIT, REWARI

ITA 738/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. Acit, Sh. Giani Ram, Vill.- Deoki, Income Tax Officer, P.O.- Bikaner, Dist. - Rewari, Rewari Haryana Pan : Blqpr1171K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Naveen Gupta, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 07.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Rohtak, For Assessment Year 2007-08, Rising Following Grounds:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. ACIT, Sh. Giani Ram, Vill.- Deoki, Income Tax Officer, P.O.- Bikaner, Dist. - Rewari, Rewari Haryana PAN : BLQPR1171K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Naveen Gupta, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr.DR Date of hearing 07.03.2017 Date of pronouncement 28.03.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Rohtak, for assessment year 2007-08,…

DCIT v. M.P.B. Kutumba Rao (43 Taxmann.com 205) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax