ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K v. ITO

75 ITR 120High Court1970#16155 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2016.

Judgments citing ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K v. ITO

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ICICI EMERGING SECTOR FUND,, BANGALORE

In the result, all the thirteen appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 505/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K.Garodia, Accounant Member

For Appellant: Shri S.E.Dastur, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Neera Malhotra, CIT &
Section 199

…icer relied on the following judicial pronouncements in support of its stand that there was no association of persons in existence and therefore the assessee should not be taxed at the maximum marginal rate. (1) A. K. Gopala Pillai v. Agricultural ITO [1970] 75 ITR 120 (Mad); (2) CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam's Family (Remainder Wealth) Trust [1977] 108 ITR 555 (SC); (3) CIT v. K. Shyamaraju (Trustees) [1991] 189 ITR 392 (Kar); and (4) Laxmipat Singhania v. CIT [1969] 72 ITR 291 (SC). 6 ITA Nos.505(B)/13, 533-535(B)/14, 633- 638(B)/13, 697(B)/15 & 836-838(Bang)2013 8. The Assessing Officer without discussi…

ACIT vs. ICICI EMERGING SECTOR FUND,

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 475/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Feb 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II(DR)
Section 61Section 63

…wing judicial pronouncements in support of its stand that there was no AOP in existence and therefore the Assessee should not be taxed at the maximum marginal rate. ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K. Vs. ITO 75 ITR 120 (Mad); (2) CWT Vs. Trustees of HEH Nizam’s Family (remainder Wealth) Trust 107 ITR 555 (SC); (3) CIT Vs. Shamaraju Trustees 56 Taxman 175 (Karn.); (4) Lakshmipat Singhania Vs. CIT 72 ITR 291 (SC). 7. The AO without discussing the facts of those cases and the ratio laid down in those decisions and as to how the facts of the Assessee’s case are dif…

ITO, BANGALORE vs. M/S INDIA ADVANTAGE FUND I, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 179/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Feb 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II(DR)
Section 61Section 63

…wing judicial pronouncements in support of its stand that there was no AOP in existence and therefore the Assessee should not be taxed at the maximum marginal rate. ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K. Vs. ITO 75 ITR 120 (Mad); (2) CWT Vs. Trustees of HEH Nizam’s Family (remainder Wealth) Trust 107 ITR 555 (SC); (3) CIT Vs. Shamaraju Trustees 56 Taxman 175 (Karn.); (4) Lakshmipat Singhania Vs. CIT 72 ITR 291 (SC). 7. The AO without discussing the facts of those cases and the ratio laid down in those decisions and as to how the facts of the Assessee’s case are dif…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ICICI EMERGING SECTOR FUND, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 177/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Feb 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II(DR)
Section 61Section 63

…wing judicial pronouncements in support of its stand that there was no AOP in existence and therefore the Assessee should not be taxed at the maximum marginal rate. ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K. Vs. ITO 75 ITR 120 (Mad); (2) CWT Vs. Trustees of HEH Nizam’s Family (remainder Wealth) Trust 107 ITR 555 (SC); (3) CIT Vs. Shamaraju Trustees 56 Taxman 175 (Karn.); (4) Lakshmipat Singhania Vs. CIT 72 ITR 291 (SC). 7. The AO without discussing the facts of those cases and the ratio laid down in those decisions and as to how the facts of the Assessee’s case are dif…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ICICI EMERGING SECTORS FUND, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 348/BANG/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Feb 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II(DR)
Section 61Section 63

…wing judicial pronouncements in support of its stand that there was no AOP in existence and therefore the Assessee should not be taxed at the maximum marginal rate. ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K. Vs. ITO 75 ITR 120 (Mad); (2) CWT Vs. Trustees of HEH Nizam’s Family (remainder Wealth) Trust 107 ITR 555 (SC); (3) CIT Vs. Shamaraju Trustees 56 Taxman 175 (Karn.); (4) Lakshmipat Singhania Vs. CIT 72 ITR 291 (SC). 7. The AO without discussing the facts of those cases and the ratio laid down in those decisions and as to how the facts of the Assessee’s case are dif…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ICICI EMERGING SECTORS FUND, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 347/BANG/2011[200809]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Feb 2015

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II(DR)
Section 61Section 63

…wing judicial pronouncements in support of its stand that there was no AOP in existence and therefore the Assessee should not be taxed at the maximum marginal rate. ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K. Vs. ITO 75 ITR 120 (Mad); (2) CWT Vs. Trustees of HEH Nizam’s Family (remainder Wealth) Trust 107 ITR 555 (SC); (3) CIT Vs. Shamaraju Trustees 56 Taxman 175 (Karn.); (4) Lakshmipat Singhania Vs. CIT 72 ITR 291 (SC). 7. The AO without discussing the facts of those cases and the ratio laid down in those decisions and as to how the facts of the Assessee’s case are dif…

ITA Nos.347 & 348/B/11 177 & 179/B/12, & 475/B/13 Page 8 of 33 (1) Gopala Pillai A.K v. ITO (75 ITR 120) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax