Jaferrali K Rattonsey v. DCIT

53 SOT 220Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#11702 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2018.

Judgments citing Jaferrali K Rattonsey v. DCIT

Nilesh Hiralal Shah, Surat vs. ACIT 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2008-2009

ITA 4355/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Nilesh Hiralal Shah, The Acit-19(1), F-1110, 11Th Floor, Income Tax Offices, Ashirvad Palace, Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Ghoddod Road, Bhatar, Vs. Mumbai - 400034 Surat - 395001 Pan: Aajps8655A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. A. Vaidya Ligan (Ar) Revenue By : Shri V. Justin (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 14/08/2018

For Appellant: Shri K. A. Vaidya Ligan (AR)For Respondent: Shri V. Justin (DR)
Section 111ASection 143Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Nilesh Hiralal Shah, The ACIT-19(1), F-1110, 11th Floor, Income Tax Offices, Ashirvad Palace, Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Ghoddod Road, Bhatar, Vs. Mumbai - 400034 Surat - 395001 PAN: AAJPS8655A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K. A. Vaidya Ligan (AR) Revenue by : Shri V. Justin (DR) Date of Hearing: 18/05/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 14/08/2018 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.03.2015 passe…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 178/JPR/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(1)Section 148

…of following decisions which are directly in its favour: Ambreshwar Grih Nirman Samiti 84 ITD 139 Starptex India P Ltd 84 ITD 320 T.S Venketation 74 ITD 298 Amarjit Singh Bakshi (HUF) 263 ITR 75 SMC Share Broker Ltd 159 Taxman 306 Jafferali K Rattonsey 53 SOT 220 Nipuan Auto P Ltd 89 DTR 342 Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd and others 68 DTR 38 Dolphine Marbles (P) Ltd 57 DTR 58 Dadhimati Syntex P Ltd 259/Jodh/2013 Dt 31/7/13. Hon’ble ITAT Jodhpur Bench Bharti Syntex Ltd 52 DTR 73 ( Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench) 3.3.2.2 Further, I also find that the established legal position on the subject under consideration…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 177/JPR/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(1)Section 148

…of following decisions which are directly in its favour: Ambreshwar Grih Nirman Samiti 84 ITD 139 Starptex India P Ltd 84 ITD 320 T.S Venketation 74 ITD 298 Amarjit Singh Bakshi (HUF) 263 ITR 75 SMC Share Broker Ltd 159 Taxman 306 Jafferali K Rattonsey 53 SOT 220 Nipuan Auto P Ltd 89 DTR 342 Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd and others 68 DTR 38 Dolphine Marbles (P) Ltd 57 DTR 58 Dadhimati Syntex P Ltd 259/Jodh/2013 Dt 31/7/13. Hon’ble ITAT Jodhpur Bench Bharti Syntex Ltd 52 DTR 73 ( Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench) 3.3.4 Further, I also find that the established legal position on the subject under consideration a…

ACIT 25(3), Mumbai vs. Vashu Bhagnani, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 5648/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Asst. Commissioner Of Shri Vashu Bhagnani, Income Tax-25(3), Prop-M/S Pooja Vs. Mumbai Construction, Pooja House, Room No. 601, C-10, 6Th 5Th Floor, Opp. J W Marriot, Floor, Pratyakshakar Juhu Tara Road, Bahvan (East), Mumbai-400049. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Ahupb2450L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Rajesh P. Shah, Ar Date Of Hearing : 18/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/05/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh P. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…nstruction (ITA No. 7040/Mum/2016) and ITO v. Vikram Muktilal Vora (ITA No. 842/Mum/2017) in respect of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th ground of appeal. In respect of the 5th ground of appeal, reliance is placed by him on the decision in Shri Jafferali K Tattonsy [53 SOT 220 (Mumbai)], Satish N. Doshi HUF [Mum ITAT] and Shaf Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. [Mum ITAT]. Finally, the Ld. counsel supports the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. Here is a case, clearly defined by the accounts. The ledger account of Daksh Diamonds appearing in the books of…

M/S. Dayanand Contractor, Rohtak vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

In the result, original

ITA 2807/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Kumar Kamal & Lalit MohanFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 263

…tment of contract does not bring about any liability to tax the income from contract in the hands of entity in whose name contract is allotted and not executing the contract. ITA No. 7698/M/2010 A.Y. 2007-08SMC Ambika JV v. ITO i) (pages 58-65 of Paper Book) 53 SOT 220 (Hyd) MEIL Sew Maytas BHEL (JV) v. ITO ii) (pages 66-72 of Paper Book) ITA No.44/2013 (Bom) CIT v. SMSL-UANRCL (JV) iii) (pages 85-89 of Paper Book) 374 ITR 35 (Del) CIT v. Oriental Structural Engineers (P)Ltd. iv) (pages 90-95 of Paper Book) 39 DTR 217 (Del) CIT vs. OrientalStructural Engineers(P) Ltd. v) (pages 55-57 of Paper Book) 166 TTJ 612 (…

M/S. Dayanand Contractor, Rohtak vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

In the result, original

ITA 2806/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Kumar Kamal & Lalit MohanFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 263

…tment of contract does not bring about any liability to tax the income from contract in the hands of entity in whose name contract is allotted and not executing the contract. ITA No. 7698/M/2010 A.Y. 2007-08SMC Ambika JV v. ITO i) (pages 58-65 of Paper Book) 53 SOT 220 (Hyd) MEIL Sew Maytas BHEL (JV) v. ITO ii) (pages 66-72 of Paper Book) ITA No.44/2013 (Bom) CIT v. SMSL-UANRCL (JV) iii) (pages 85-89 of Paper Book) 374 ITR 35 (Del) CIT v. Oriental Structural Engineers (P)Ltd. iv) (pages 90-95 of Paper Book) 39 DTR 217 (Del) CIT vs. OrientalStructural Engineers(P) Ltd. v) (pages 55-57 of Paper Book) 166 TTJ 612 (…

ITO 32(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Ramchand M. Raimalani (HUF), Mumbai

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

ITA 5325/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am Ito 32(3)(1) Vs. Shri Ramchand M. Room No.107, 1St Floor Raimalani (Huf) Aayakar Bhavan Flat No.1303, Building M.K. Road No.3, Raheja Classique, Mumbai – 400 020 New Link Road, Oshiwara Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400 053 Pan/Gir No. Aakhr5279P Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…ment. 3.7 On similar issue and facts, where additions were made on the basis of statements made by Shri Mukesh Chokshi, different tribunals have ruled in favour of assessee. Reference is made to order of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Jaffarali K. Rattansoy (2012)53 SOT 220 (Mum), order of ITAT Jaipur in the case of ITO v. Smt Meera Vaid (2015)154 ITD 128 (Jaipur) and order of ITAT Pune in the case of Smt Smita Patil v. ACIT (2014) 159 TTJ 182 (Pune). After considering the totality of facts and various judicial decision and also after considering my Ld. Predecessor's order in the related case I have come to a conclus…

M/S. Dayanand Contractor, Rohtak vs. ITO, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2027/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, & Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Vasanthan Sr. DR
Section 144A

…tment of contract does not bring about any liability to tax the income from contract in the hands of entity in whose name contract is allotted and not executing the contract. ITA No. 7698/M/2010 A.Y. 2007-08SMC Ambika JV v. ITO i) (pages 58-65 of Paper Book) 53 SOT 220 (Hyd) MEIL Sew Maytas BHEL (JV) v. ITO ii) (pages 66-72 of Paper Book) ITA No. 44/2013 (Bom) CIT v. SMSL-UANRCL (JV) iii) (pages 85-89 of Paper Book) 374 ITR 35 (Del) CIT v. Oriental Structural Engineers (P)Ltd. iv) (pages 90-95 of Paper Book) 39 DTR 217 (Del) CIT vs. OrientalStructural Engineers(P) Ltd. v) (pages 55-57 of Paper Book) 166 TTJ 612…

Sunil Prakash, Mumbai vs. ACIT 15(2), Mumbai

ITA 6494/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Aditya Ajgaonkar-ARFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ई मुंबई ई ई ” ” ” ” खंडपीठ ई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं पवन "सह, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं पवन "सह एवं पवन "सह पवन "सह "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Pawan Singh, Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./6494/Mum/2014, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Shri Sunil Praka…

Jaferrali K Rattonsey v. DCIT (53 SOT 220) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax