ITO (1983) 37 CTR (All) 49 (1984) 145 ITR 255 (Ail), Sri Vindhya Vasini Prasad Gupta v. CIT

186 ITR 253High Court1990#17137 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing ITO (1983) 37 CTR (All) 49 (1984) 145 ITR 255 (Ail), Sri Vindhya Vasini Prasad Gupta v. CIT

M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., UNIT SATNA CEMENT WORKS,SATNA vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeals

ITA 34/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 5(2)(b)

…lcutta High court in the case of Katihar Jute Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1979) 120 ITR 861 (Cal), decision of Allahabad High court in the case of S.P. Kochhar vs. ITO (1983) 37 CTR (All) 49 (1984) 145 ITR 255 (Ail), Sri Vindhya Vasini Prasad Gupta vs. CIT (1990) 186 ITR 253 (Art) and the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hope Textiles Ltd. 09g7) 143 CTR (MP) 33 . (1997) 22s ITR 993 (MP). " 21. Further, this Tribunal had set aside the order on the limited issue to the Ld. AO. to verify whether any of the foreign suppliers had a Permanent Establishment in Under the respective DT…

M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., UNIT SATNA CEMENT WORKS,SATNA vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeals

ITA 33/IND/2020[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Indore28 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 5(2)(b)

SONI SONU MIRCHANDANI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, NEW DELHI

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 1286/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. And Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shyam Anuragi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…Tribunal. We rely upon the Judgments of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of S.P. Kochhar 33 ITA.No.1286/Del./2020 Smt. Soni Sonu Mirchandani, New Delhi. vs., ITO 145 ITR 255 [All.] and Shri Vindhya Basini Prasad Gupta vs., Commissioner of Income Tax 186 ITR 253 [All.], Judgment of Calcutta High Court in the case of Katihar Jute Mills Pvt. Ltd., vs., Commissioner of Income Tax 120 ITR 861 [Cal.]. Considering the above, it is clear that when the parties have allowed the earlier Order of the Tribunal to become final, it is binding on the authorities below and the Ld. CIT(A) shall have to decide the same in…

MIRAH HOSPITALITY & FOOD SOLUTIONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4693/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: The Itat In These Cases Against A Common Order Of Learned Cit(A) For A.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Dated 28.5.2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of “Hotels & Resorts”, Filed The Return Of Income For The Ay 2009-2010 Declaring The Total Loss Of Rs.43,15,534/- After Set Off Of Ltcg Of Rs. 1,31,36,082/-. Assessee Is A Group Concern Of M/S. Twinkle Group. There Was A Search & Seizure Action On The Said M/S. Twinkle Group U/S 132 Of The Act. Accordingly, In Response To The Notice U/S 153A Of The Act, Assessee Filed The Return Of Income Declaring The Same Total Loss (Rs. (-) 43,15,334/-). Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 143(3) R.W.S 153A Of The Act Determining The Total Loss Of Rs. 3,82,977/- Which Include Certain Disallowances & Rs. 27,68,422/- Is One

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…uant to order of the Hon'ble Tribunal, Ld. AO has no jurisdiction to make the said adjustment 1. 234 ITR 548 (Bom.) MurlidharBhagwandas v. CIT 2. 19 ITR(Trib) 126 (Mum. - Trib.) Computree Infotech (P.) Ltd. v. ITO 3. 145 ITR 255 (All.) S. P. Kochhar v. ITO 4. 186 ITR 253 (All) Sri Vindhya Vasini Prasad Gupta v. CIT 5. 115 taxmann.com 288 (Guj.) Engineering Professional Co. (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT 6. 268 Taxman 213 (Madras) Neeta Suneel Shah Do. Ramesh Bhai Doshi v. ITO 7. 213 ITR 502 (Madras), Raja DV Seetharamaya v. WTO 8. Furthermore, learned Counsel of the assessee also filed additional ground for A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2…

SWARN JAYANTI RAIL NAGAR FLAT OWNERS ASSOCIATION,NOIDA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2705/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnsh Sainiita No. 2705/Del./2018 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: G.C.Srivastava, Adv. Sh. Suvinay Dash, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L.Anuragi, Sr. DR

…e, the jurisdiction 6 of the AO is confined to such issue only. In support of above proposition of law, I rely upon decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of S.P. Cochar 145 ITR 255, decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of Sri Vidhyavasni Gupta 186 ITR 253 and decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of Kathiar Jute Mills 120 ITR 86. Since, in the present case the Tribunal restored the issue of expenses of Rs. 28,70,532/- only to the AO vide order dated 13th October, 2016, the assessing officer should have confined to this issue only in set aside proceeding u/s 143(3) / 254 of IT Act in the impu…