Hansa Dalakoti v. ACIT

50 SOT 511Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#25164 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

section 80acsection 80asection 139(1)section 139section 80previous yearsection 13prescribedpersoncompanysection 14india

Judgments citing Hansa Dalakoti v. ACIT

DCIT, Swargate Pune vs. Cummins India Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 1256/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 250Section 35

…a) Symboisis Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2017) 190 TTJ 518 (Chandigarh ITAT) b) Fiberfill Engineers vs. CIT (2016) 177 TTJ 556 (Del. Tribunal) c) Shree Ganesh Concast Group of Industries vs DCIT in ITA No. 829/Chd/2018 d) Hansa Dalakoti vs. ACIT (2012) 50 SOT 511 (Delhi) e) Olavanna Service Co-op. Bank vs. ITO in ITA No. 398/Coch/2014 f) Shri Bhagyalaxmi Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. vs DCIT in ITA No. 01/PAN/2023; and g) Sangam Souharda Credit Sahakari Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 30/PAN/2023 47. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We observe that assessee made a claim of de…

DCIT, Circle, Yamunanagar vs. M/S Symbiosis Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Yamunanagar

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 326/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Due Date As Prescribed In Section 139(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Whereas The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income After The Due Date.

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 80ASection 80I

…Court also. Holding thus, the delay was condoned. The facts and circumstances of the case at ITA 326/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 27 hand, as discussed, warrant the delay in question to be condoned. 14.7 In “Hansa Dalakoti Vs ACIT”, 2012 (4) TMI 264 (ITAT Delhi) : 50 SOT 511 (Delhi) (copy at ACL PB –II pages 106-110), as in the present case, whereas the return of income was delayed, the Audit Report had been filed before the due date. The Tribunal held that since the assessee had filed all the necessary documents supporting the claim for deduction u/s 80IC before the due date of filing the return, the mere fact th…

Sureaksha DB Realty, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 30(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 482/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Suraksha Db Realty The Dy. Commissioner Of Behind Orchid Suburbia, Ground Income-Tax 30(3), Floor, Off; Link Road, Kandivali Room No.601, C-13, Vs. 6Th Floor, Bkc, (West), Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abofs0694R Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Department By : Shri Op Sharma, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri OP Sharma, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69CSection 80

…documents relevant to the claim are also filed within the due date then the deduction u/s 80 IB needs to be allowed. iii. The AR of the appellant has placed reliance on the following decision viz Hansa Dalakoti V ACIT (2012) 32 CCH 211 (del) (tribunal)/20 12/ 50 SOT 511 (Delhi), ITO versus S Venkatiaaah (2012) 32 CCH 386, vanshee Builders and developers ITA number 386/bng/2012 and CIT versus Ramco international 180 Taxman 584 Punjab and Haryana. He also distinguished the decision of Dwarkadas G Panchmatiya versus ACIT (supra) iv. for assessment year 2010 – 11 to assessment year 2014 – 15 deduction u/s 80 IB was c…

Hansa Dalakoti v. ACIT (50 SOT 511) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax