ITR 77 (Guj). (iii) CIT vs. Kejriwal Iron Stores 168 ITR 715 (Raj.) (iv) CIT v. Reliance Petropruducts Pvt. Ltd.

190 ITR 402High Court1991#23324 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148 Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

Judgments citing ITR 77 (Guj). (iii) CIT vs. Kejriwal Iron Stores 168 ITR 715 (Raj.) (iv) CIT v. Reliance Petropruducts Pvt. Ltd.

Vinod Gugnani, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-30(1), Delhi

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

ITA 3764/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. CIT(A) has allowed the claim of the assessee u/s 54 of the Act and sustained the other disallowances made by Assessing Officer.

Section 143(2)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

…i) New Sorathia Engg. Co. vs. CIT [2006] 282 ITR 642 (Gujrat) (ii) CIT vs. Lakhdhir Lalji 85 ITR 77 (Guj). (iii) CIT vs. Kejriwal Iron Stores 168 ITR 715 (Raj.) (iv) CIT vs. Reliance Petropruducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (v) CIT vs. Nepani Biri Co. Trust (1991) 190 ITR 402, 403 (All.) (vi) Pankaj Kumar Gupta vs. Ito (ITAT Lucknow) ITA No.486/LKW/2016. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the lower authorities. Vinod Gugnani vs. ITO 10. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, I observed that Assessing Officer has levied the penalty on the disallowance made by him relat…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Resurgere Mines and Minerals India Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1531/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA and Shri Ashish Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…would not mean that there was concealment of income] ii) CIT vs. University Printers, (1991) 188 ITR 206(AII) [mere rejection of the explanation of the assessee would not mean that there was concealment of income] iii) CIT vs. Nepani Biri Co. Trust, (1991) 190 ITR 402, 403(AII) [where the difference between the income returned and the income assessed was due to 'disallowance of expenditure claimed by the assessee] iv) CIT vs. Dhamchand 1. Shah,(1993) 204 ITR 462, 468-69(Bombay) [penalty cannot be sustained merely on the grounds that certain additions ITA No.- 1531/Del/2017. M/s Resurgere Mines and Minerals…

DCIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vinamra Universal Traders P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 2018/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain Dy. C.I.T. – 8(3)(2) M/S. Vinamra Universal Room No. 615, 6Th Floor Traders Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Jai Centre, 1St Floor Mumbai 400020 34, P. D’Mello Rd., Opp. Red Gate Mumbai 400009 Pan – Aaccv5090J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. S. Padmaja & Shri S.K. PodarFor Respondent: Shri Vijaya Mehta & Shri Govind Javeri

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 94(7)

…y Pipe Traders - 213 ITR 282 (Born), ACIT vs. Kalpaka Baxar - 46 ITD 221 - ITAT Cochin Bench, Addl. CIT vs. Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. 1986 (157) - ITR 0822 DEL, 181 ITR 410 (MP) (1990) 6 M/s. Vinamra Universal Traders Pvt. Ltd. J.K. Jajoo vs. CIT, 190 ITR 402 (All) (1991) CIT vs. Nepani Bin Company Trust, 46 ITD 331- ITAT Bombay Bench D - Yaasmin Properties (P) Ltd. vs ACIT. 3.1 The A.O. having considered the same observed in his order as under: "The contention of the assessee is considered but found not acceptable because of the following reasons: Regarding disallowance of dividend stripping u/s.94(7…