Dilip Kumar Jain v. ITO

40 ITD 414Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#17856 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Judgments citing Dilip Kumar Jain v. ITO

M/S. Maverick Share Brockers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 41/JPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena, PCIT
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ch proposition, reliance is placed on the following: i) Lalji Haridas vs. ITO and another 43 ITR 387 (SC). M/s Marverick Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur ii) Dilip Kumar Jain vs. ITO 5 ITD 552 (ITAT, Indore). iii) ITO vs. Miss Vasudha Bajoria 40 ITD 414 (Cal.) iv) M.P. Ramchandran vs. DCIT 129 TTJ 190 at page 195 (ITAT Mumbai). Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of G.K. Consultants Limited, vs Income Tax Officer, in ITA No. 1502/Del/2013 (Case Law PB-II APB 255-263) has held as under: (APB 262) “19. On careful consideration of above contention, we are of the view that there may be a substantive asses…

M/S. Maverick Share Brockers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 40/JPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena, PCIT
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ch proposition, reliance is placed on the following: i) Lalji Haridas vs. ITO and another 43 ITR 387 (SC). M/s Marverick Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur ii) Dilip Kumar Jain vs. ITO 5 ITD 552 (ITAT, Indore). iii) ITO vs. Miss Vasudha Bajoria 40 ITD 414 (Cal.) iv) M.P. Ramchandran vs. DCIT 129 TTJ 190 at page 195 (ITAT Mumbai). Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of G.K. Consultants Limited, vs Income Tax Officer, in ITA No. 1502/Del/2013 (Case Law PB-II APB 255-263) has held as under: (APB 262) “19. On careful consideration of above contention, we are of the view that there may be a substantive asses…

M/S. Maverick Share Brockers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 39/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena, PCIT
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ch proposition, reliance is placed on the following: i) Lalji Haridas vs. ITO and another 43 ITR 387 (SC). M/s Marverick Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur ii) Dilip Kumar Jain vs. ITO 5 ITD 552 (ITAT, Indore). iii) ITO vs. Miss Vasudha Bajoria 40 ITD 414 (Cal.) iv) M.P. Ramchandran vs. DCIT 129 TTJ 190 at page 195 (ITAT Mumbai). Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of G.K. Consultants Limited, vs Income Tax Officer, in ITA No. 1502/Del/2013 (Case Law PB-II APB 255-263) has held as under: (APB 262) “19. On careful consideration of above contention, we are of the view that there may be a substantive asses…

M/S. Maverick Share Brockers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 38/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena, PCIT
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ch proposition, reliance is placed on the following: i) Lalji Haridas vs. ITO and another 43 ITR 387 (SC). M/s Marverick Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur ii) Dilip Kumar Jain vs. ITO 5 ITD 552 (ITAT, Indore). iii) ITO vs. Miss Vasudha Bajoria 40 ITD 414 (Cal.) iv) M.P. Ramchandran vs. DCIT 129 TTJ 190 at page 195 (ITAT Mumbai). Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of G.K. Consultants Limited, vs Income Tax Officer, in ITA No. 1502/Del/2013 (Case Law PB-II APB 255-263) has held as under: (APB 262) “19. On careful consideration of above contention, we are of the view that there may be a substantive asses…

Y.P. Punj Family Trust, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7614/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri A K Kardam
Section 271(1)(c)Section 64

…rs of income. Before us, the Ld. Counsel has cited following decision in support of the contention no penalty can be levied on protective basis :- CIT v Super Steel (Sales) Co. 178 ITR 451(Cal) Metal Stores vs CIT 186 ITR 612(Gau) ITO vs Miss Vasudha Bajoria 40 ITD 414(ITAT-Kol) CIT v Smt. Durgawati Singh 234 ITR 249(All) Whereas, the Ld. DR has strongly relied upon the order of the CIT(A). 4. On the perusal of the impugned order and facts and materials on record, we find that both the authorities have discussed in detail, the colourable device but failed to understand that, once an income has already been off…

Dilip Kumar Jain v. ITO (40 ITD 414) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax