ITO v. Hari Om Gupta

45 ITR (Trib) 137Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2016#17932 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing ITO v. Hari Om Gupta

Gopal Krishan Dubey, Noida vs. ITO, Ward- 1(4), Noida

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 6085/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…vs. Shri Kishan Dass ITA No. 915/De;/2012 (AY 2008-09) order dated 7.6.20013 (Trib.); ITO vs, Shri Chander Shekar ITA No. 430/D/2013 AY 2009-10 dated 4.3.20019; CIT vs. Green Field Hotels and Estates (P) Ltd. 389 ITR 68 (Bom.) (HCV); ITO vs. Hariom Gupta 45 ITR (Trib) 137 Lucknowl (Tri.); Atul G Puranik 132 ITD 499 (Mum( (Tri.); Kanecast P. Ltd. vs. ITO 68 SOT 199 (Pune) (Tri.); Mrs. Rekha Agrawal vs. ITO 79 Taxmann.com 290 (Jaipr) (Tri.); and Baniara Engs. Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO ITA No. 635/Kol/2018 order dated 4.7.2018 (Tri.). 4. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.…

ITO 22(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Liladhar R. Tandel, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas Cross

ITA 959/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicil Member

For Appellant: Shri. Hari S. RahejaFor Respondent: Shri. V. Jenardhanan

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…vs. ITO (132 ITD 499 (Mum))  Pratap Steel Re-rolling Mills P Ltd - 155 TTJ 294 (Mum)  ACIT vs. Nadir Nazarali Dhanani (ITA No. 100/Mum/2013 dated 09.10.2015)  Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010 dated 30.11.2015)  ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR (Trib) 137)  ITO vs. Pradeep Steel Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (155 TTJ 294)  Kancast P. Ltd. vs. ITO (68 SOT 110) (Pune)  M/s. Heatex Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No.8197/Mum/2010] decided on 24.07.2013 Liladhar R. Tandel ITA No.959/Mum./2014 C.O No.153/Mum/2017 15. Respectfully following the above judicial pronouncements, we do not find any i…

Subash Subramanian, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 3406/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate

Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ A’ (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3406/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2007-2008. Shri. Subash Subramanian Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.3/4, Arisikaran Street, Non Corporate Ward 2(4) Mylapore, Chennai Chennai 600 004. [PAN EZJPS 7395C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by JCIT. : 02-03-2017 सु…

ITO 22(3)(2), Navi Mumbai vs. Meghi Parbat Patel, Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6390/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-22(3)(2) Shri Meghji Parbat Patel, 3Rd Floor, Room No.307, Prop. G.D.Enterprises, बनाम/ Tower No.6, Vashi Rly Flat B-5, Plot No.46, Vs. Station Complex, Vashi, Anand Niketan Chs, Navi Mumbai Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400705 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Afmpp7902H

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…of various Benches of the ITAT: - (i) ACIT vs. Nadir Nazarali Dhanani (ITA No. 100/Mum/2013 dated 09.10.2015) (ii) Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010 dated 30.11.2015) (iii) Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO (132 ITD 499) (iv) ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR (Trib) 137) (v) ITO vs. Pradeep Steel Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (155 TTJ 294) 7 Shri Meghji Parbat Patel ITA Nos.6390/Mum/2014 vi) Kancast P. Ltd. vs. ITO (68 SOT 110) 5.2 Per contra, the learned D.R. for Revenue strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and contended that section 50C of the Act is a special provision for computing cap…

Farid Gulmohamed, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 5136/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri Farid Gulmohamed Income Tax Officer C/O. M/S. B.C. Dastur & Co. (Internationla Tax) 3(1) Vs. Reliance Bldg., 3Rd Floor Schindia House, Ballard Estate 269, D.N. Road, Mumbai Mumbai 400038 Pan - Aefpg3094K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…of various Benches of the ITAT: - (i) ACIT vs. Nadir Nazarali Dhanani (ITA No. 100/Mum/2013 dated 09.10.2015) (ii) Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010 dated 30.11.2015) (iii) Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO (132 ITD 499) (iv) ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR (Trib) 137) (v) ITO vs. Pradeep Steel Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (155 TTJ 294) vi) Kancast P. Ltd. vs. ITO (68 SOT 110) 5.2 Per contra, the learned D.R. for Revenue strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and contended that section 50C of the Act is a special provision for computing capital gains in certain cases and would include not on…