Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hren Bhatt

43 DTR 329High Court2010#24964 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 350,364 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hren Bhatt

Income Tax Officer-16(1)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S.Re N Raga Media Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6311/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer - 16(1)(5) V. M/S. Re N Raga Media Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 439, 4Th Floor Bungalow No. A/8, Svp Nagar Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nr. Mhada Telephone Exchange, Mumbai-400 020 Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 053

For Appellant: Shri Birju S. ShahFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari

Section 131Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 68

…plication u/s I44A remained unattended. Therefore, this plea of the Assessing Officer does not hold good on the facts and in law. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Knubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt [(2010) 43 DTR 329]. 11. Coming to the merits of the case, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee vide letter dated 23.12.2016 has furnished the annual accounts of the shareholder as on 31.03.2009 along with the copies of secretarial compilation report, copy of Form 66 filed with ROC, copy of Form 20B, 23AC and 23ACA filed with ROC for the year ende…

Emson Tools Mfg Corp Ltd, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 845/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaemson Tools Mfg. Corpn. Ltd., Vs. The D.C.I.T.,(Cc-I), D-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aaace3698M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sarabjit GargFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT

Section 132Section 142Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…e that it is dated 31.03.2014J-however, as per photo copy of the envelope enclosed, it is clear that it was delivered to postal authorities on 01. 04.2014. Hence, it being time barred is invalid as held in case of Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) vs. Hren Bhatt (2010) 43 DTR 329 (Guj.). In this case meaning of the word to issue was defined as "to issue" - Meaning send out. Notice signed on 31/3/2010 sent to speed post on 7/4/2010 - It was held to be issued after Six years for the relevant A.Y. 2003-04. The assessee also relies upon the following case law:- Jashan Textiles Mills P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2006) 284 ITR 542 (Bom) G…

Asst CIT Cir 21(3), Mumbai vs. Suncity Housing, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 5183/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5183/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

For Appellant: None

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…ng.)) c) ACIT v. Sheth Developers P. Ltd., (33 SOT 277 (Mum.)) d) Bengal Ambuja Housing Development Ltd. v DCIT ITA No 1595/ Kol/ 2005 e) Arpanna Development Corp. v. ITO f) SJR Builders v. ACIT,(3 ITR 569 (Mum.) ITA 5183/Mum/2014 11 g) G.V. Corpn. V. ITO, 43 DTR 329 (Mum.) h) CI'T v. Brahma Associates, judgment dated 22.2.2011 (Born.). i) Ekta Housing Pvt, Ltd. v. DCIT'(ITA no. 3649/Mum./2009) j) Aakar Associates v. ITO (ITA No 2903/Ahd/2008). k) ACIT v. GHP Enterprises (ITA No 6746/Mum/2007) l) Arun Excello Foundation Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2007) 108 TTJ 71 (Chennai) Thus, the assessee firm submitted that dedu…