(iii) CIT v. Mrs Sarita P. Shirke & Anr.

281 ITR 373High Court2006#24195 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 350,364 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2019.

Judgments citing (iii) CIT v. Mrs Sarita P. Shirke & Anr.

The Dy. DIT (Exemption), Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Friends of Wwb India, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assesseee both are dismissed

ITA 1608/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…w. That, mere tax planning, without any motive to evade taxes through colourable devices is not frowned upon even by the judgment of this court in McDowell and Co. Ltd.'s case (supra).” 14. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mrs. Sarita P. Shirke in 281 ITR 373 had the occasion to consider a transaction alleged to be a colourable device and the relevant observations of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court reads as under:- “A concurrent finding has been recorded by both the lower authorities that the amount lying in the account of respondent No. 1/assessee in Vasco was transferred by demand draft to her account…

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…ults in reduction of tax to an assessee, the same cannot be brushed aside on the ground that the underlying motive of entering into the transaction by the assessee was to reduce its tax liability to the state.” (iii) CIT Vs. Mrs Sarita P. Shirke & Anr. (2006) 281 ITR 373 (Bom): Held as under: “In any case, even otherwise, if a person is entitled to an exemption in law and accordingly makes a plan to avoid the tax liability which is otherwise legally entitled to it would not amount to tax evasion.” xxi. Thus, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (supra) held in explicit terms that…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…ults in reduction of tax to an assessee, the same cannot be brushed aside on the ground that the underlying motive of entering into the transaction by the assessee was to reduce its tax liability to the state.” (iii) CIT Vs. Mrs Sarita P. Shirke & Anr. (2006) 281 ITR 373 (Bom): Held as under: “In any case, even otherwise, if a person is entitled to an exemption in law and accordingly makes a plan to avoid the tax liability which is otherwise legally entitled to it would not amount to tax evasion.” xxi. Thus, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (supra) held in explicit terms that…

(iii) CIT v. Mrs Sarita P. Shirke & Anr. (281 ITR 373) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax