K. Ravindranathan Nair v. CIT

1 SCC 135Reported decision2001#21739 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Judgments citing K. Ravindranathan Nair v. CIT

DCIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Dmg Finance Investment Private Limited, New Delhi

ITA 3432/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Dmg Finance Investment Private Central Circle-15, Limited, New Delhi. Flat No.1, First Floor, Dakshineshwar, 10 Hailey Road, New Delhi – 110 001. Pan: Aaacd3459K

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debesh Panda, Special Counsel

Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Vs DMG Finance Investment Private Central Circle-15, Limited, New Delhi. Flat No.1, First Floor, Dakshineshwar, 10 Hailey Road, New Delhi – 110 001. PAN: AAACD3459K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate & Ms Ragini Handa, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Debesh Panda, Special Counsel, Shri Udbhav Gady, Advocate, Shri Ruchir Joshi, Advocate & Shri Vas Dev Verma, Advocate Date of Hearing : 18.10.2024 Dat…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 3 vs. M/S Gtm Builder and Promoters Pvt. Ltd

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/180/2021HC Delhi02 May 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

Section 153ASection 260A

…that they only relate to the findings of fact and the order of the ITAT cannot be construed in any manner to be ex-facie perverse. 21. It would be apposite to refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of K. Ravindranathan Nair v. CIT [(2001) 1 SCC 135], wherein, the Court has propounded the parameter to determine the findings of the Tribunal to be perverse. The relevant paragraphs of the said decision are extracted hereunder for reference: “7. The High Court overlooked the cardinal principle that it is the Tribunal which is the final fact-finding authority. A decision on fact of the Tribun…

Commnr. of Customs (Import) vs. Stoneman Marble Industries

C.A. No.-004371-004383 - 2004Supreme Court21 Jan 2011

Section 111Section 112Section 125Section 130A

…Judges of this Court had held that: “7. The High Court overlooked the cardinal principle that it is the Tribunal which is the final fact-finding authority. A decision on fact of the Tribunal can be gone into by the High 3 AIR 1955 SC 271 4 (2001) 1 SCC 135 8 Court only if a question has been referred to it which says that the finding of the Tribunal on facts is perverse, in the sense that it is such as could not reasonably have been arrived at on the material placed before the Tribunal. In this case, there was no such question before the High Court. Unless and until a finding of fact reached b…