(i) Pradeep Kumar Dhir v. ACIT

93 ITD 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#26044 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Judgments citing (i) Pradeep Kumar Dhir v. ACIT

HCL COMNET LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1113/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmahcl Comnet Limited Vs. Dcit, 806, Sidharth, Circle-11(1), 96, Nehru Place, Room No. 416, New Delhi C.R.Building, Pan : Aach9667H New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 254(2)

…to be assessable during the year under consideration credit for TDS relating to this income cannot be allowed this year. In this regard the following other decisions in the cases of (i) Pradeep Kumar Dhir v. ACIT 107 ITD 118 (Chd.); (iii) Tejram v ITO (2005) 93 ITD 1 (Chd.) etc may be seen. 4.4.4.10 The issue is clinched in CIT vs Sint. Pushpa Vijoy 2012] 19 taxmann.com 157 (Ker.), where the HC of Kerala, interpreting the provisions held that in view of provisions of section 199, assessee is entitled to credit of tax based on TDS certificates only in assessment year in which income from which tax is deducted is…

NAGNATH HANMANTAPPA JALKOTE,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1297/PUN/2015[BP]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Oct 2018

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 158B

…assessee to further support his submissions that no penalty is leviable where protective assessment has 6 been made in respect of some addition placed reliance on following decisions : i. ITO Vs. Miss Vasudha Bajoria, 43 TTJ 373; ii. DCIT Vs. Rajan H. Shinde, 93 ITD 1 (TM); iii. Mohd. Khasim and Others Vs. ACIT, 36 ITR 471 (Bang. Trib.); iv. CIT Vs. Saraf Agencies Ltd., 394 ITR 444 (Cal.). 3.2 In respect of addition on account of NSS withdrawals and family trip to Nepal, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee inadvertently failed to declare the withdrawal amount from NSS account in his regular return of income.…

SURESH KUMAR GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-28(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

ITA 1158/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2017AY 2007-2008

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri SallongYaden, Addl. CIT, DR

Section 133(6)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…had admitted from inadvertent mistake and which is a natural phenomenon incidental in normal course of business. Suresh Kumar Gupta Assessment Year: 2007-08 5. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that in the case of Dy. C.I.T. V. Rajan H. Shinde [2005] 93 ITD 1 Pune (TM) wherein it was held that "Concealment cannot be presumed merely because assessee has offered additional income." The assessee had also cited a judgment in the case of C.I.T'. V. Reliance Petro-products (P). Ltd. [2010] 189 Taxman 322/230 CTR 320/322 ITR 158 (SC) wherein it was held that - "A mere making of claim, which is not sustainable i…