ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das

52 ITR 335Supreme Court of India1964#1110 most cited

What is ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das authority for?

The Supreme Court clarified that an appellate authority's 'finding' must be essential for disposing of the appeal for the relevant assessment year, not an incidental observation about another year's income. Appellate authorities cannot issue directions on matters not directly arising in the appeal for the specific assessment year, especially regarding escaped income, which has separate statutory mechanisms.

100

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das · 52 ITR 335 SC · Section 150 Income Tax Act · appellate authority powers · finding or direction · reassessment limitation period · Section 251 · Section 33(4) · scope of appeal order · escaped income · previous year distinct unit

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 150Section 149Section 251Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 150(1)section 150(2)section 33(4)section 150section 245hasection 147(a)true and full disclosuresection 10(2)section 34(1)section 33section 18section 148(2)

Judgments citing ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das

M/S. G.S. Atwal & Company (Engineers) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2114/KOL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 148

…cheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263 of the Act. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an…

25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Range -6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 3085/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2798/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2012-13) Ito, Range-6(3)(1) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Room No.524, 5Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower 400020. Parel, Mumbai-400013. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3085/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Range-6(3)(1) 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Room No.524, 5Th Floor, Vs. N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Parel, Mumbai-400013. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz2076J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala & Madhur Aggarwal Revenue By: Shri Achal Sharma (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. Ita. No.2798/Mum/2018 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai Relevant To The A.Y.2012-13. 3085/M/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala & MadhurFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 56(1)

…he thinks fit. These powers nowhere allow the CIT(A) to transfer beyond the scope of 40 3085/M/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 appeal. More these instructions or/ direction can affect the third party. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Muralidhar Bhagwan Das [52 ITR 335] has discussed the powers of the CIT(A) to analyze what constitutes a “finding” in appeal. The extract of the finding is hereby as under: - ““If that be the correct meaning, any finding on an irrelevant or extraneous matter would be a finding. That certainly cannot be the intention of the legislature. The Madras High Court also in A.S. Khader Ism…

ITO 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. 25 Fps Media Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2798/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2798/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2012-13) Ito, Range-6(3)(1) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Room No.524, 5Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower 400020. Parel, Mumbai-400013. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3085/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Range-6(3)(1) 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Room No.524, 5Th Floor, Vs. N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Parel, Mumbai-400013. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz2076J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala & Madhur Aggarwal Revenue By: Shri Achal Sharma (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. Ita. No.2798/Mum/2018 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai Relevant To The A.Y.2012-13. 3085/M/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala & MadhurFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 56(1)

…he thinks fit. These powers nowhere allow the CIT(A) to transfer beyond the scope of 40 3085/M/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 appeal. More these instructions or/ direction can affect the third party. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Muralidhar Bhagwan Das [52 ITR 335] has discussed the powers of the CIT(A) to analyze what constitutes a “finding” in appeal. The extract of the finding is hereby as under: - ““If that be the correct meaning, any finding on an irrelevant or extraneous matter would be a finding. That certainly cannot be the intention of the legislature. The Madras High Court also in A.S. Khader Ism…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Delhi vs. Hamdard National Foundation (India)

ITA/144/2021HC Delhi16 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 11Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)

…f Income Tax, Madras, AIR 1968 SC 317; ii. The Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal v. Brijlal Lohia & Mahabir Prasad Kemka, Executors of Late Kanailal Lohia, (1972) 4 SCC 432; iii. Income Tax Officer, A Ward, Sitapur v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das, (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC); and iv. Distributors (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., (1986) 1 SCC 43. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant/revenue further submits that in the present case, the „market rent‟, as found by the Assessing Officer, had been confronted to the respondent/assessee, however, the respondent/assessee never asked for the sourc…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Delhi vs. Hamdrd National Foundation (India)

ITA/115/2021HC Delhi16 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 11Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)

…f Income Tax, Madras, AIR 1968 SC 317; ii. The Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal v. Brijlal Lohia & Mahabir Prasad Kemka, Executors of Late Kanailal Lohia, (1972) 4 SCC 432; iii. Income Tax Officer, A Ward, Sitapur v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das, (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC); and iv. Distributors (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., (1986) 1 SCC 43. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant/revenue further submits that in the present case, the „market rent‟, as found by the Assessing Officer, had been confronted to the respondent/assessee, however, the respondent/assessee never asked for the sourc…

M/S. Sahara City Homes, Bareilly vs. Income Tax Officer - 3(4), Range- 3, Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 24/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Bareilly V. Ito-3(4) 2, Sahara India Centre Range 3 Kapoorthala Complex Lucknow Aliganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs2472C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Amritsar V. Ito-3(4) 2, Sahara India Centre Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs4654E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Kanpur(I) V. Acit 2, Sahara India Centre Range 3 Kapoorthala Complex Lucknow Aliganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs2468Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Guwahati V. Acit 2, Sahara India Centre Range 3 Kapoorthala Complex Lucknow Aliganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs2462E (Appellant) (Respondent)

…completed assessment. Such directions are entirely uncalled for and are required to be expunged. In this respect reliance has been placed on the following case laws: a. Mrs. R. H. Dave v CIT [140 ITR 1035 (Cal)] (ABP 640- 645). b. ITO v Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [52 ITR 335 (SC)] (ABP 646-666). ITA No.24 to 39/LKW/2019 Page 40 of 46 c. N. Kt. Sivalingam Chettiar v CIT [66 ITR 586 (SC)] (ABP 667-671). d. Bakshish Singh v ITO [93 ITR 178 (Cal)] (ABP 721- 729). e. Order of the ITAT, Kolkata Bench, in the case of ITO v. Sri Biswajit Chatterjee in ITA no. 565/Kol/2013 dated 10.11.2017 (ABP 672-679). f. Order of the ITA…

Sanjeev Dhawan, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 63(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2690/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sanjeev Dhawan Vs Income-Tax Officer, 10103/3, Pul Bangash, Azad Market, Ward 63(1), New Delhi. Delhi-110006 Pan- Aagpd4848M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Rajesh Gupta Ca Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2022

Section 80I

…e assessment. But he cannot refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment; nor can he direct the Officer to decide in accordance with his directions. B. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- 6 Sanjeev Dhawan Vs. ITO “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspe…

Mohan Sukumaran, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Bilaspur(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 141/BIL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR

…IT(Appeals) has no jurisdiction to issue ‘directions’ to the AO suggesting enhancement of income concerning other assessment years not in appeal before him and his action in this regard is opposed to the ratio of the SC in ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagawan Das (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC). (iii) The issue of service tax was a matter of agitation in AY 2011-12 and consequently, the assessment order in that year on the issue of service tax stood merged with the first appellate order of the then CIT(Appeals) and hence the present incumbent had no jurisdiction to review the subject matter and issue directions in such an instance.…

Mohan Sukumaran, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Bilaspur(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 140/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR

…IT(Appeals) has no jurisdiction to issue ‘directions’ to the AO suggesting enhancement of income concerning other assessment years not in appeal before him and his action in this regard is opposed to the ratio of the SC in ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagawan Das (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC). (iii) The issue of service tax was a matter of agitation in AY 2011-12 and consequently, the assessment order in that year on the issue of service tax stood merged with the first appellate order of the then CIT(Appeals) and hence the present incumbent had no jurisdiction to review the subject matter and issue directions in such an instance.…

M/S. G.S. Atwal & Company (Engineers) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1938/KOL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234DSection 250Section 32(1)(iia)

…cheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263 of the Act. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an…

M/S. G.S. Atwal & Company (Engineers) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1937/KOL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234DSection 250Section 32(1)(iia)

…cheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263 of the Act. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an…

Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Tally India Pvt Ltd

In the result, we do not find

ITA/307/2018HC Karnataka06 Apr 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 143(2)Section 153(1)(a)Section 153(3)(ii)Section 260Section 260ASection 92C

…o either issuing a direction / finding within the meaning of Section 153(3)(ii) of the Act. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions of the Supreme Court in 'INCOME-TAX OFFICER VS. MURLIDHAR BHAGWAN DAS', (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC), 'RAJINDER NATH VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX', (1979) 2 TAXMAN 204 (SC) and a decision of the Allahabad High Court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA VS. CHANDRA BHAN BANSAL', (2014) 46 TAXMANN.COM 108 (ALLAHABAD). 6. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the rec…

Nandlal L. Kodnaney, Mumbai vs. ITO 26(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 4924/MUM/2014[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2020AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: Shri Mayur A. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik (Sr. DR)
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)

…corresponding to ss. 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act) on one of the heirs of the Late Rangalal Jajodia. The words ‘finding and direction’ have found clear enunciation by the Apex Court in ITO v. Nandlal L. Kondnaney v. ITO, Mumbai Muralidhar Bhagavandas [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) and Rajendranath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC), both relied upon in Krishna Devi (Lt.) (supra). The Andhra Pradesh High Court in Mohammadi Begum & Anr. v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 662 (AP) dealt with a case where the assessments were set aside u/s. 264, directing the ITO to make fresh assessments in accordance with law inasmuch as the income of the…

Janardan Mishra, Guwahati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Guwahati

ITA 261/GTY/2018[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Dec 2019AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 153(3)(ii)Section 254

…onfined. Sec. 153(3)(ii) is not a provision enlarging the jurisdiction of the authority or Court. It is a provision which merely raises the bar of limitation for making an assessment order under s. 143 or s. 144 or s. 147: ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC); TC 41 R.2168 and N.K.T. Sivalingam Chettiar vs. CIT (1967) 66 ITR 586 (SC); TC 51R.2042. The question formulated by the Tribunal raises the point whether the AAC could convert the provisions of s. 147(1) into those of s. 153(3))(ii) of the Act. In view of s. 153(3)(ii) dealing with limitation merely, it is not easy to appreciate the relevanc…

Janardan Misra, Guwahati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Guwahati

ITA 260/GTY/2018[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Dec 2019AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 153(3)(ii)Section 254

…onfined. Sec. 153(3)(ii) is not a provision enlarging the jurisdiction of the authority or Court. It is a provision which merely raises the bar of limitation for making an assessment order under s. 143 or s. 144 or s. 147: ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC); TC 41 R.2168 and N.K.T. Sivalingam Chettiar vs. CIT (1967) 66 ITR 586 (SC); TC 51R.2042. The question formulated by the Tribunal raises the point whether the AAC could convert the provisions of s. 147(1) into those of s. 153(3))(ii) of the Act. In view of s. 153(3)(ii) dealing with limitation merely, it is not easy to appreciate the relevanc…

Karnavati Polyster Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2344/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2344/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Karnavati Polyester Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T, B/H Cozy Hotel, Circle-2(1)(2), Vs. Ranipurpatia Bus Stand, Ahmedabad. Narol-Sarkhej Highway, Ahmedabad-382441. Pan: Aabck4806G

Section 147Section 31Section 32Section 33(4)Section 34Section 36(1)(va)

…on to the AO to reopen the cases under section 147 of the Act on account of the excess claim of depreciation. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of ITO Vs. MuralidharBhagwan das reported in 52 ITR 335 wherein it was held as under: “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an ITO to bring to Asstt. Year 2014-1…

Devas Multimedia Private Limited vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax

WP/11618/2016HC Karnataka27 Sept 2019

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri Writ Petition No.11618 Of 2016 (T-It) Between:

Section 142(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 263Section 92C

…jurisdiction of the authority or court. It is a provision which merely raises the bar of limitation for making an assessment order under Section 143 or Section 144 or Section 34 147. (ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [AIR 1965 SC 342 : (1964) 52 ITR 335] and N. Kt. Sivalingam Chettiar v.CIT [(1967) 66 ITR 586 (SC)] ) The question formulated by the Tribunal raises the point whether the Appellate Assistant Commissioner could convert the provisions of Section 147(1) into those of Section 153(3)(ii) of the Act. In view of Section 153(3)(ii) dealing with limitation merely, it is not easy to…

K Gopal Raj, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Cen.Circle-1(3), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 773/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Esther N. Hangal
Section 132Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.No. ITA No. AY Appellant Respondent/ Cross Objector 1&2 342/H/15 Income-tax Kosetty and Kishore, Officer, Ward – C.O. No. 2009-10 Hyderabad. 7(3), Hyderabad. 65/H/16 PAN – AKJPK7013Q 3 & 4 343/H/15 Kosetty and 2009-10 -do- Nagaraju, C.O. No. Hyderabad. 66/H/16 PAN – AEDPR 3702Q 5 765/H/17 2009-10 Asst. Shri K. Gopal Commissioner of Raj, Income-tax, Circle Hyderabad. – 7(1), Hyderabad. PAN – AIBPK 1167E 6 773/H/17 2009-10 Shri K. Gopal Raj, Dy. Hyderabad.…

ACIT, Circle-7(1), Hyderabad vs. K Gopal Raj, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 765/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Esther N. Hangal
Section 132Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.No. ITA No. AY Appellant Respondent/ Cross Objector 1&2 342/H/15 Income-tax Kosetty and Kishore, Officer, Ward – C.O. No. 2009-10 Hyderabad. 7(3), Hyderabad. 65/H/16 PAN – AKJPK7013Q 3 & 4 343/H/15 Kosetty and 2009-10 -do- Nagaraju, C.O. No. Hyderabad. 66/H/16 PAN – AEDPR 3702Q 5 765/H/17 2009-10 Asst. Shri K. Gopal Commissioner of Raj, Income-tax, Circle Hyderabad. – 7(1), Hyderabad. PAN – AIBPK 1167E 6 773/H/17 2009-10 Shri K. Gopal Raj, Dy. Hyderabad.…

ITO, Ward-7(3), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Kosetty Nagaraju, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 343/HYD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Esther N. Hangal
Section 132Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.No. ITA No. AY Appellant Respondent/ Cross Objector 1&2 342/H/15 Income-tax Kosetty and Kishore, Officer, Ward – C.O. No. 2009-10 Hyderabad. 7(3), Hyderabad. 65/H/16 PAN – AKJPK7013Q 3 & 4 343/H/15 Kosetty and 2009-10 -do- Nagaraju, C.O. No. Hyderabad. 66/H/16 PAN – AEDPR 3702Q 5 765/H/17 2009-10 Asst. Shri K. Gopal Commissioner of Raj, Income-tax, Circle Hyderabad. – 7(1), Hyderabad. PAN – AIBPK 1167E 6 773/H/17 2009-10 Shri K. Gopal Raj, Dy. Hyderabad.…