Development (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (1995) 52 ITD 103 (Patna) (AT) 3. Patil Enterprise v. ACIT

42 ITD 373Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1992#20929 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2019.

Judgments citing Development (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (1995) 52 ITD 103 (Patna) (AT) 3. Patil Enterprise v. ACIT

ROHINI HOTEL (MADRAS) PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1842/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr. R.S.Balaji, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh-

…nt in this regard, 1. Sayar Engineering (P) Ltd Vs ITO (1992) 43 TTJ23(JP) AT 2. Nishant Housing Development (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (1995) 52 ITD 103 (Patna) (AT) 3. Patil Enterprise Vs ACIT (1995) 53 TTJ 279 (Bang) (AT) 4. ITO Vs Pitambar industries (P) Ltd (1992) 42 ITD 373 (Delhi) AT 5. ITO Vs Dream land Enterprise (1995) 81 Taxman 143 (And) (AT) 6. Smt.Rekha Devi Vs ACIT (1995) 78 Taxman 143 30(JP) Attention is also invited to the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs Daya Chand Jain Vaidya where it has been held that onus is upon the department to prove that higher investment was made by the asse…

ROHINI HOTEL (MADRAS) PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1841/CHNY/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr. R.S.Balaji, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh-

…nt in this regard, 1. Sayar Engineering (P) Ltd Vs ITO (1992) 43 TTJ23(JP) AT 2. Nishant Housing Development (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (1995) 52 ITD 103 (Patna) (AT) 3. Patil Enterprise Vs ACIT (1995) 53 TTJ 279 (Bang) (AT) 4. ITO Vs Pitambar industries (P) Ltd (1992) 42 ITD 373 (Delhi) AT 5. ITO Vs Dream land Enterprise (1995) 81 Taxman 143 (And) (AT) 6. Smt.Rekha Devi Vs ACIT (1995) 78 Taxman 143 30(JP) Attention is also invited to the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs Daya Chand Jain Vaidya where it has been held that onus is upon the department to prove that higher investment was made by the asse…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2) , CHENNAI vs. ROHINI HOTELS (MADRAS) PVT. LTD. , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1687/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr. R.S.Balaji, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh-

…nt in this regard, 1. Sayar Engineering (P) Ltd Vs ITO (1992) 43 TTJ23(JP) AT 2. Nishant Housing Development (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (1995) 52 ITD 103 (Patna) (AT) 3. Patil Enterprise Vs ACIT (1995) 53 TTJ 279 (Bang) (AT) 4. ITO Vs Pitambar industries (P) Ltd (1992) 42 ITD 373 (Delhi) AT 5. ITO Vs Dream land Enterprise (1995) 81 Taxman 143 (And) (AT) 6. Smt.Rekha Devi Vs ACIT (1995) 78 Taxman 143 30(JP) Attention is also invited to the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs Daya Chand Jain Vaidya where it has been held that onus is upon the department to prove that higher investment was made by the asse…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2) , CHENNAI vs. ROHINI HOTELS (MADRAS) PVT. LTD. , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1627/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr. R.S.Balaji, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh-

…nt in this regard, 1. Sayar Engineering (P) Ltd Vs ITO (1992) 43 TTJ23(JP) AT 2. Nishant Housing Development (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (1995) 52 ITD 103 (Patna) (AT) 3. Patil Enterprise Vs ACIT (1995) 53 TTJ 279 (Bang) (AT) 4. ITO Vs Pitambar industries (P) Ltd (1992) 42 ITD 373 (Delhi) AT 5. ITO Vs Dream land Enterprise (1995) 81 Taxman 143 (And) (AT) 6. Smt.Rekha Devi Vs ACIT (1995) 78 Taxman 143 30(JP) Attention is also invited to the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs Daya Chand Jain Vaidya where it has been held that onus is upon the department to prove that higher investment was made by the asse…

Development (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (1995) 52 ITD 103 (Patna) (AT) 3. Patil Enterprise v. ACIT (42 ITD 373) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax