Gaurav Contracts Co. v. DCIT

64 Taxmann.com 333High Court2015#21200 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)section 5(2)share capital and share premiumsource of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorsection 250(4)borrowed satisfactionadmission of additional evidenceshare application moneytangible materialrule 46anon-resident

Judgments citing Gaurav Contracts Co. v. DCIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Snowshine Realtors Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1443/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…had escaped assessment for the purpose of the provisions of section 147 of the act. 10. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the position of law laid down by Gujarath High Court in the case of Gaurav Contracts Co., V. DCIT (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 333 (Guj). wherein it is held that, an opinion of an audit party cannot be basis for reason to believe for the purpose of the provisions of section 147 of the act 11. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the position of law laid down by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax — 6,…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1442/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…had escaped assessment for the purpose of the provisions of section 147 of the act. 10. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the position of law laid down by Gujarath High Court in the case of Gaurav Contracts Co., V. DCIT (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 333 (Guj). wherein it is held that, an opinion of an audit party cannot be basis for reason to believe for the purpose of the provisions of section 147 of the act 11. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the position of law laid down by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax — 6,…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1-(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1441/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…had escaped assessment for the purpose of the provisions of section 147 of the act. 10. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the position of law laid down by Gujarath High Court in the case of Gaurav Contracts Co., V. DCIT (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 333 (Guj). wherein it is held that, an opinion of an audit party cannot be basis for reason to believe for the purpose of the provisions of section 147 of the act 11. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the position of law laid down by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax — 6,…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Jaico Realtors Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1444/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year :2008-09 M/S. Jaico Realtors Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner No. 2650, Ground Floor, Of Income Tax, 37Th B Cross, Vs. 28Th Main, 9Th Block, Central Circle – 1 (4), Bangalore. Jayanagar, Bangalore – 560 009. Pan: Aabcj8421G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.N. Prakash, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 147Section 68

…tax had escaped assessment for the purpose of the provisions of section 147 of the act. 9. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the positionof law laid down by Gujarat High Court in the case of Gaurav Contracts Co., V.DCIT (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 333 (Guj), wherein it is held that, an opinion of anaudit party cannot be basis for reason to believe for the purpose of the provisionsof section 147 of the act. 10. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the positionof law laid down by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr.Commissioner ofIncome Tax - 6, Vs.…

Gaurav Contracts Co. v. DCIT (64 Taxmann.com 333) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax