Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT

82 ITR 913Supreme Court of India1971#430 most cited
209

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT · Section 269SS penalty · Section 269T penalty · Section 271D penalty · Section 271E penalty · cash transactions penalty · literal interpretation tax law · legislative intent tax · income deemed assessee's · definition of relative

Also reported as

49 Taxmann 87

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 131(1A)Section 132ASection 269SSSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)closely held companyprincipal director general of income-taxaccumulated profitssection 292bsection 292bbsection 260section 260asection 282section 292section 119section 29

Judgments citing Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT

SEEMA SUREKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2682/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…ed by the Hon'ble Bench in the case of Gyanchand M. Bardia (supra).\nWhile relying on hon'ble apex court's judgment in CIT v. Sodra Devi [1957] 32 ITR\n615, Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC) and Keshavji Ravji&\nCo. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC), the Hon'ble bench has observed that\nprinciples of literal interpretation in respect of the relevant context vis-à-vis the\nlegislation intention have to be applied here as there is no ambiguity in definition\nof a \"relative\" in respect to an individual donee in the above definition clause.\nCoupled with this, the legislature itself has acc…

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…97); and Dhiren Chemicals (254 ITR 554). In the following decisions courts have held that even if it is a benevolent circular it is binding on the authorities of the tax department: Navnitlal C. Jhaveri (56 ITR 198 at 203) (SC); Ellerman Lines Ltd versus CIT (82 ITR 913 at 920-1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and UCO Bank versus CIT (237 ITR 89) (SC). The aforesaid amendment carried out by the Finance Act, 2015 to section 2(24) of the Act is applicable prospectively from Assessment Year 2016-17 and onwards. Based on the facts and circumstances of our case, the objects or intent of the statutory provisions of…

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…97); and Dhiren Chemicals (254 ITR 554). In the following decisions courts have held that even if it is a benevolent circular it is binding on the authorities of the tax department: Navnitlal C. Jhaveri (56 ITR 198 at 203) (SC); Ellerman Lines Ltd versus CIT (82 ITR 913 at 920-1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and UCO Bank versus CIT (237 ITR 89) (SC). The aforesaid amendment carried out by the Finance Act, 2015 to section 2(24) of the Act is applicable prospectively from Assessment Year 2016-17 and onwards. Based on the facts and circumstances of our case, the objects or intent of the statutory provisions of…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 618/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 617/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL ,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 616/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 615/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 614/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 613/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 612/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

VISHWANATH AGGARWAL ,DELHI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-05, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 611/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…e v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of hearing, it was also submitted that penalties u/s 271D/271E cannot be levied for violation of section 269SS/269T if the same sums have been treated as income of the assessee. In this regard a copy of the assessment order, reasons fo…

KURUKSHETRA EXPRESSWAY PVT LTD,REWARI vs. DCIT CIRCLE, REWARI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 9544/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anu Krishna Aggarwal
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Kurukshetra Expressway Vs. DCIT Pvt. Ltd. Circle, Rewari Toll Plaza, Gangayancha Jaat, Vill. Mastapur, NH-71, Rewari Haryana Haryana-123401 PAN AADCK9096J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Neeraj Jain, Advocate Shri Saksham Singhal, Advocate Department by: Ms. Anu Krishna Aggarwal, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing: 14.05.2024 Date of 06.06.2024 pronouncement: O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM The appeal of assessee is against order dated 16.10.2019 of…

ACIT,CIRCLE 20(1), MUMBAI, LALBAUG MUMBAI vs. VIRJI DEVRAJ GADA, MATUNGA (W) MUMBAI

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

ITA 4321/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhariassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R
Section 10Section 10(29)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Smt. Gayatri Devi Birla (1997) 91 Taxman 239 (MP) wherein the Hon’ble High Court by following the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Keshavji Ravji & Co. vs. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1 (SC), having held that interest paid to firm is liable to be deducted from the interest received from firm and only net interest is liable to be charged to tax. Though the LD. DR did not refute the aforesaid judgement and therefore the impugned order on this count do not requires any interference , however we otherwise observe that in the instant c…

SHIVAM BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 317/AHD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 317/Ahd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) िनधा"रण वष" Shivam Builders Private Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम Limited Income Tax Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, Rajvi Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad Arcade, Nr. Gurukul Drive In Road, Memnagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs0296D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Hem Chhajed, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/04/2024 09/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.07.2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal:

For Respondent: Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…e jurisdiction was not with the DCIT and, therefore, the issue of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act by the DCIT was incorrect. In this regard, he has relied upon following decisions: i. UCO Bank vs. CIT, [1999] 104 Taxman 547 (SC) ii. Keshavji Ravji & Co. vs. CIT, 183 ITR 1 (SC) iii. DCIT & Anr. vs. Proficient Commodities Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., [2020] 58 CCH 0291 (Kol. Trib.) iv. Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. vs. ACIT, [2019] 73 ITR 0670 (Mum. Trib.) 5. On merits, the ld. AR submitted that the documents as required by the AO were submitted by the assessee but the evidences brought on record were brushed aside by the…

DEEPENDRA SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 17(2)(1) MUMBAI, BANDRA EAST

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2690/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledeependra Singh, Vs. Ito Ward-17(2)(1), 504 Pushpa Kunj, Kautaliya Bhavan, A Road,Marine Lines, Bandra East, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400050. Pan/Gir No. : Akips3319N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri H.N.Motiwalla.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.D.Chougle. Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…f consideration to be the value adopted or assessed for stamp duty purposes" This being benevolent circular is binding as per following judgements of the Supreme Court: (i) Navnit Lal C. Javeri Vs. K.K. Sen [56 ITR198(SC)] (ii) Ellernan Lines Ltd. vs. CIT [82 ITR 913 (SC)] iii) K.P. Varghese Vs. ITO [131 ITR 597(SC)] Deependra Singh, Mumbai. (iv) UCO Bank Vs. CIT [237 ITR 889 (SC)] Hence we request you to give effect to the same, following the circular and aforesaid judgments Whereas the AO was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt at Para 5.1 to 5.5 of the order and assessed the total income of Rs.9…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 953/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, III Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [PAN:AAFCS44916D] (अपीलाथ"…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 945/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, III Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [PAN:AAFCS44916D] (अपीलाथ"…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 944/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, III Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [PAN:AAFCS44916D] (अपीलाथ"…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 943/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, III Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [PAN:AAFCS44916D] (अपीलाथ"…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 942/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, III Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [PAN:AAFCS44916D] (अपीलाथ"…

Showing 1–20 of 209 · Page 1 of 11

...