Khandelwal Rubber Products (P) Ltd. v. CIT

162 Taxmann.com 897High Court2024#23050 most cited
3

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

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 10BSection 139(1)Section 154Section 250(1)Section 68Section 80IAB

Issues it is cited on

section 143(1)(a)section 143(1)section 11section 143(2)section 143section 14section 143(3)indianfacbusiness

Judgments citing Khandelwal Rubber Products (P) Ltd. v. CIT

MAHAKOSHAL REFRACTORIES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6454/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2020-21 Mahakoshal Refractories Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax-15(1)(1), E-309, Crystal Plaza, Vs. Mumbai. Opposite Infinity Mall, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053. Pan : Aaecm4903B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Shri Annavaram Kosuri Date Of Hearing : 02-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-06-2025 Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Addl/Jcit(A)-Panchkula[„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 16-10-2024, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21, Wherein The Assesseehas Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…heintimation u/s. 143(1)of the Act had no relevance as it was supposed to be subsumed into the order u/s 143(3)of the Actand reliance was placed on the judgement of the Hon‟ble Allahabad High Court in case of 4 Khandelwal Rubber products Pvt ltd vs CIT (2024) 162 Taxmann.com 897 (Allahabad) wherein it was held as under: "21. On general principle, it is fundamental to the scheme of the Act that there may only arise one assessment order for one assessment year in the case of any assesses. Once that order came to be passed under section 143(3) of the act, it is only that assessment order that may be enforced against…

MANTRI COSMOS II OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 21/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.20 & 21/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Mantri Cosmos Ii Owners Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Welfare Association Income Tax, Circle 6(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaeam1297J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates K Hari Prasad & K Karthik राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt.M Narmada, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 21/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocates K Hari Prasad and KFor Respondent: : Smt.M Narmada, CIT(DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…sessee has challenged the scrutiny assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Khandelwal Rubber Products (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in (2024) 162 Taxmann.com 897. The learned AR has further submitted that even otherwise, the Assessing Officer has taken up this issue of claim of deduction u/s 80IAB and decided the same which passing the scrutiny assessment. Thus, the learned AR has submitted that the action of the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT (A) is highly arbitrary and unjustified…

MANTRI COSMOS II OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 20/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.20 & 21/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Mantri Cosmos Ii Owners Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Welfare Association Income Tax, Circle 6(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaeam1297J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates K Hari Prasad & K Karthik राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt.M Narmada, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 21/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocates K Hari Prasad and KFor Respondent: : Smt.M Narmada, CIT(DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…sessee has challenged the scrutiny assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Khandelwal Rubber Products (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in (2024) 162 Taxmann.com 897. The learned AR has further submitted that even otherwise, the Assessing Officer has taken up this issue of claim of deduction u/s 80IAB and decided the same which passing the scrutiny assessment. Thus, the learned AR has submitted that the action of the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT (A) is highly arbitrary and unjustified…

Khandelwal Rubber Products (P) Ltd. v. CIT (162 Taxmann.com 897) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax