J.N. Chandrashekar v. ITO

160 ITD 653Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#22888 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 362,824 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing J.N. Chandrashekar v. ITO

Smt. Vishalakshi Devi, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Bengaluru

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2797/BANG/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 144Section 148Section 234A

…the filing of appeal before the Tribunal was delayed. As against this, the ld. DR of revenue strongly opposed the condonation of delay. She placed reliance on Tribunal order of Bangalore bench rendered in the case of J.N. Chandrashekar Vs. ITO as reported in 160 ITD 653 and also placed ITA Nos. 2795 to 2797/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 9 reliance on anotherTribunal order of Mumbai Bench rendered in the case of Prashant Projects Limited Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 7167/Mum/2011 dated 04.09.2013 copy submitted. In the rejoinder the ld. counsel for the assessee placed reliance on another judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in…

Smt. Vishalakshi Devi, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Bengaluru

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2796/BANG/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 144Section 148Section 234A

…the filing of appeal before the Tribunal was delayed. As against this, the ld. DR of revenue strongly opposed the condonation of delay. She placed reliance on Tribunal order of Bangalore bench rendered in the case of J.N. Chandrashekar Vs. ITO as reported in 160 ITD 653 and also placed ITA Nos. 2795 to 2797/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 9 reliance on anotherTribunal order of Mumbai Bench rendered in the case of Prashant Projects Limited Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 7167/Mum/2011 dated 04.09.2013 copy submitted. In the rejoinder the ld. counsel for the assessee placed reliance on another judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in…

Smt. Vishalakshi Devi, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Bengaluru

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2795/BANG/2017[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 144Section 148Section 234A

…the filing of appeal before the Tribunal was delayed. As against this, the ld. DR of revenue strongly opposed the condonation of delay. She placed reliance on Tribunal order of Bangalore bench rendered in the case of J.N. Chandrashekar Vs. ITO as reported in 160 ITD 653 and also placed ITA Nos. 2795 to 2797/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 9 reliance on anotherTribunal order of Mumbai Bench rendered in the case of Prashant Projects Limited Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 7167/Mum/2011 dated 04.09.2013 copy submitted. In the rejoinder the ld. counsel for the assessee placed reliance on another judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in…

J.N. Chandrashekar v. ITO (160 ITD 653) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax