ITO v. Varial Pratik Engineering

120 TTJ 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#18928 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Judgments citing ITO v. Varial Pratik Engineering

RAGHAV KUMAR DHOOT,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

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

ITA 491/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT- DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 292BSection 68

…ent\nlegislative amendment adding section 292BB supports this principle. The\nquestion has, thus, to be answered against the assessee.\"\n(emphasis supplied)\nIt is held by the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Income-tax Officer v. Varia\nPratik Engineering [2009] 120 TTJ 1 (Ahmedabad - ITAT) (30-09-2008]\nas under.-\n\"41. The assessee has fairly conceded before the CIT(A) as also before\nus that he has fully participated in the enquiry and the proceedings\nrelated to the assessment for the year under appeal. No material has\nbeen placed before us to show that any objection was raised before the\nAO in terms of the p…

M/S. JAKSON ENTERPRISES,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are

ITA 6791/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: - Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: - Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT- DR

Section 14ASection 153ASection 80

…- ITA No. 38/2014 dated 25.7.2014 (Karnataka). iii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia 24 Taxman.com 98 (Del). iv) Promain Ltd. Vs. DCIT 95 ITD 489 (Del) (SB). v) M.B. Lal 279 ITR 298 (Del) vi) Dr. A.K. Bansal, 355 ITR 513 (All). vii) ITO vs. Varia Pratik Engineering 120 TTJ 1 (Ahd) viii) CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora, ITA No. 56/2011 (All. H.C.) ix) DCIT vs. Apoorva Extrusion Pvt. Ltd. & ors. ITA Nos. 3308/Del/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03) & ors. Order dated 09.10.2014. 9. Having gone through the orders of the authorities below, we find that the Learned CIT(Appeals) has rejected the contentions of the assessee on the issue of validity…

DCIT vs. M/S ASHA BUSINESS CENTRE LTD.,,

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands allowed, while the appeal by the department is dismissed

ITA 1577/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…im. It is also submitted that in several judicial pronouncements (Decision of High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Aravali Engineers P. Ltd. Vs CIT, (2011) 11 TAxmann.com 291, decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench “C” in ITO Vs Varial Pratik Engineering (2009) 120 TTJ 1 (AHD), it has been held that once the assessee has appeared in any proceeding or co-operated in any inquiry related to the assessment, then the assessee cannot be permitted to raise any of the objections enumerated in the said section.” I -. ' . , ; ; ; .~ ~ .: - ~ ~' ''':. ' , ,. . f 3.8 In view of the AO’s report, there is no merit in the…

M/S ASHA BUSINESS CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands allowed, while the appeal by the department is dismissed

ITA 1400/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292B