(i). RMP Perianna Pillai & Co. v. CIT

42 ITR 370High Court1961#17893 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing (i). RMP Perianna Pillai & Co. v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, ( Central)-2, Raipur vs. Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Raipur

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 179/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.169 & 179/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 & 2016-2017) Acit-2, Raipur Vs Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Shri Shyam Tower, Kavita Nagar, Main Road, Avanti Vihar, Raipur Pan No. : Afdpa 6944 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 145(3)

…y no means can be stretched any further to form a standalone reason for rejecting his books of accounts for the said subsequent year. Our aforesaid conviction is fortified by the following judicial pronouncements: (i). RMP Perianna Pillai & Co. Vs. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 370 (Mad) (ii). CIT Vs. Winner Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 81 CCH 91 (Del) (iii). CIT Vs. K S Bhatia (2004) 269 ITR 57 (P&H) At this stage, we may herein observe that the AO while rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee for the year under consideration, i.e AY 2014- 15, had observed, that as the assessee in the preceding years i.e AYs 2006-…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur vs. Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Raipur

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 169/RPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.169 & 179/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 & 2016-2017) Acit-2, Raipur Vs Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Shri Shyam Tower, Kavita Nagar, Main Road, Avanti Vihar, Raipur Pan No. : Afdpa 6944 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 145(3)

…y no means can be stretched any further to form a standalone reason for rejecting his books of accounts for the said subsequent year. Our aforesaid conviction is fortified by the following judicial pronouncements: (i). RMP Perianna Pillai & Co. Vs. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 370 (Mad) (ii). CIT Vs. Winner Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 81 CCH 91 (Del) (iii). CIT Vs. K S Bhatia (2004) 269 ITR 57 (P&H) At this stage, we may herein observe that the AO while rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee for the year under consideration, i.e AY 2014- 15, had observed, that as the assessee in the preceding years i.e AYs 2006-…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur vs. Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Raipur

ITA 43/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 43/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

…y no means can be stretched any further to form a standalone reason for rejecting his books of accounts for the said subsequent year. Our aforesaid conviction is fortified by the following judicial pronouncements: (i). RMP Perianna Pillai & Co. Vs. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 370 (Mad) (ii). CIT Vs. Winner Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 81 CCH 91 (Del) (iii). CIT Vs. K S Bhatia (2004) 269 ITR 57 (P&H) At this stage, we may herein observe that the AO while rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee for the year under consideration, i.e AY 2014- 15, had observed, that as the assessee in the preceding years i.e AYs 2006…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(Central)-2, Raipur vs. M/S Radheshyam Agrawal, Raipur

ITA 42/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 42/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Radheshyam Agarwal L-24, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aacfr8916J ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

…y no means can be stretched any further to form a standalone reason for rejecting his books of accounts for the said subsequent year. Our aforesaid conviction is fortified by the following judicial pronouncements: (i). RMP Perianna Pillai & Co. Vs. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 370 (Mad) (ii). CIT Vs. Winner Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 81 CCH 91 (Del) (iii). CIT Vs. K S Bhatia (2004) 269 ITR 57 (P&H) At this stage, we may herein observe that the AO while rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee for the year under consideration, i.e AY 2014- 20 ACIT, (Central)-2 Vs. Radheshyam Agarwal 15, had observed, that as the…

Ascendas (India) Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1255/CHNY/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1255/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2005-2006. M/S. Ascendas (India) Private Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ist Floor, International Techpark, Income Tax, Pinnacle Building, Corporate Circle I(1) Taramani Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 113. [Pan Aaacj 9055H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Raghunathan Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Assessing Officer is not sustainable and supported his arguments with followings decisions :- (a) ‘’DCIT vs Nagarjuna Investment Trust Ltd (1998) 65 ITD 17 (Hyd) (b) Mysore Minerals Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Bangalore) (c) R.M.P. Perianna Pillai & Co vs. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 370 (Mad) (d) Pandit Bros. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 159 (Pun) (e) CIT vs. Salitho Ores Ltd. (2010) 344 ITR 161 (Bom) (f) Eastern Investments Ltd vs. CIT (1951) 20 ITR 1 (SC) (g) CIT vs. Walchand & Co etc. (1967( 65 ITR 271(SC) (h) CIT vs. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC) (i) CIT vs. A. Raman & Co (1968) 67 ITR 11 (SC) (j) Sri Ramalin…

(i). RMP Perianna Pillai & Co. v. CIT (42 ITR 370) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax