Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali v. Commissioner of Income Tax

396 ITR 226High Court#20732 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 344,197 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Judgments citing Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali v. Commissioner of Income Tax

Smt. Amita Rajvedi, Allahabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Allahabad

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 67/ALLD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…ng Officer under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act and confirmed the levy of penalty while passing the impugned order. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 396 ITR 226 (Bom) and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that the interest for delay in filing the return of income has to be computed after excluding the period from the date the inspection was asked for by the assessee till inspection was given. The Hon'ble High Court has thus held that the Department is not justified in charging the interest f…

Smt. Amita Rajvedi, Allahabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Allahabad

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 66/ALLD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…ng Officer under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act and confirmed the levy of penalty while passing the impugned order. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 396 ITR 226 (Bom) and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that the interest for delay in filing the return of income has to be computed after excluding the period from the date the inspection was asked for by the assessee till inspection was given. The Hon'ble High Court has thus held that the Department is not justified in charging the interest f…

Smt. Amita Rajvedi, Allahabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Allahabad

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 65/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…ng Officer under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act and confirmed the levy of penalty while passing the impugned order. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 396 ITR 226 (Bom) and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that the interest for delay in filing the return of income has to be computed after excluding the period from the date the inspection was asked for by the assessee till inspection was given. The Hon'ble High Court has thus held that the Department is not justified in charging the interest f…

Smt. Amita Rajvedi, Allahabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Allahabad

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 64/ALLD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…ng Officer under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act and confirmed the levy of penalty while passing the impugned order. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 396 ITR 226 (Bom) and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that the interest for delay in filing the return of income has to be computed after excluding the period from the date the inspection was asked for by the assessee till inspection was given. The Hon'ble High Court has thus held that the Department is not justified in charging the interest f…

Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali v. Commissioner of Income Tax (396 ITR 226) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax