Late Janak K. Kansara v. DCIT

116 TTJ 415Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#22109 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Judgments citing Late Janak K. Kansara v. DCIT

Vipul Purshottamdas Thakkar, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 784/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah & Shri Rushin PatelFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 54B

…of the Act. The law, as it stood at the relevant time provided that a belated return, though valid, could not be revised in terms of section 139(5) of the Act. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on the case of Janak K. Kansara v. DCIT 116 TTJ 415 (Ahmedabad – ITAT), wherein it was held that in a block return which is filed beyond time-limit of 45 days prescribed in notice but before completion of assessment is a valid return and same cannot be ignored by Assessing Officer. However, the issue before us is not whether the returned filed beyond the time period of 45 days is a valid return or…

Jivrajbhai Ramabhai Chaudhary, Banaskantha vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Palanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1024/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt.Year :2017-18 Jivarajbhai Ramabhai Chaudhary Income Tax Officer Patel Vas, Village : Hadta, Jadiya Vs Ward-3 Tal. Dhanera Palanpur. Dist: Banaskantha Gujarat. Pan : Azzpp 6148 A (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Jimi Patel, Ar Assessee By : Ms.Neeju Gupta, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/11/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Ms.Neeju Gupta, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250

…s valid. He, therefore, stated that the order of the AO without issuing notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was not in accordance with the law, and needed to be quashed. In this regard he drew my attention to various decisions viz: i) Janak Kansara Vs. DCIT, (2008) 116 TTJ 415 (Ahd- ITAT); ii) PCIT Vs. Kamladevi Sharma, ITA No.197/2008 dated 10.07.2018 (Rajasthan) 16. The ld.DR, on other hand, pointed out that the AO had stated that it had issued notice to the assessee prior to treating the return as invalid. And she drew my attention to the same in the paper book filed by the assessee at page no.28 as under: 9 17.…

Flovel Energy Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-9(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6485/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ratchi Bimal, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 62 taxmann.com 340 (Bangalore-Trib) 8 8. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that the return filed after the expiry of given time prescribed in notice u/s 148 is also a valid return:- i) Late Janak K. Kansara vs. DCIT (2008) 116 TTJ 415 (Ahd-Trib); ii) CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma (2011) 336 ITR 678 (All); iii) PCIT vs. Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 (Del); & iv) DCIT vs. Ms Mayawati (2010) 135 TTJ 274 (Del-Trib). 9. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the provision of section 292BB does not cure non-issuance of n…