Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co. v. ITO (

158 ITR 705High Court1986#22829 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,487 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Judgments citing Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co. v. ITO (

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. M/S. Shakti Pumps (India) Ltd., Indore

ITA 1358/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit (Central)-2, Shakti Pumps (India) Ltd. Indore 226, Shastri Market, बनाम/ M.G. Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aaecs 5027 L Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Vijay Bansal, Ars Date Of Hearing 23/11/2022 / 22.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.04.2023

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 263

…ecision on these matters is not to be a subjective or arbitrary decision but a judicial decision and cannot be accepted if there is no material to support his finding [emphasis supplied] a) S. Veeriah Reddiar [1960] 38 ITR 152 (Ker) b) JA Trivedi Bros. [1986] 158 ITR 705 (MP), SLP dismissed: [1991] 187 ITR (St.) 37 (SC) 2.38 The head note in the case of decision of Cristopia Energy Systems Pvt. Ltd 2010] 16 ITJ 8 (Indore), by Hon'ble jurisdictional ITAT bench, read - “Assessee engaged in manufacturing chillers and nodules - during the year, assessee used two new raw materials, which resulted in substantial increa…

M/S Silver and Art Palace, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

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

ITA 236/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 158BSection 246ASection 250Section 271A

…Party (1999) 240 ITR 778 (Raj), in case of Hari Gopal Singh Vs. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 85 (P&H), in case of CIT Vs. Ravail Singh & Co.[2002] 254 ITR 191 (P&H), in case of CIT v. Raj Bans Singh [2005] 276 ITR 351 (All), in case of J. A. Trivedi Bros. v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 705 (MP) and in case of Bombay Hardware Syndicate v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 586 (Mad). 35. It was finally submitted that it is clear that penalty has been imposed without considering the argument made before the A.O. and Ld. CIT(A), further, as demonstrated hereinbefore basic ingredients of imposing penalty u/s 271AAB i.e. any income represented by cert…

Brics Gilt Finance P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is hereby Allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1157/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.1157/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Brics Gilt Finance Private बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax 1(2) Vs. 4Th Floor, Sadhna House, Room No.537, 570 P.B.Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Behind Mahindra Towers, New Marine Lines, Worli, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400018 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacj8885B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. Doshi &For Respondent: Shri M. Rajan

Section 10(34)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…essment order, it is quite clear that no satisfaction has been recorded by the Assessing Officer to dishonor the claim of the assessee. No doubt in view of the law settled in Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co. Vs. ITO (176 ITR 253)(Bom) and Trivedi Bros (JA) Vs. CIT (158 ITR 705)(MP) and CIT Vs. A.Y. 2010-11 Margadarshi Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd. (155 ITR 442)(MP) and DCIT Vs. Mewar Textiles Mills Ltd. (64 TTJ 502) (JP-Trib) the finding of the CIT(A) is not liable to be sustainable in the eyes of law. It is also not in dispute that while calculating the average investment for the purpose of Rule 8D of the Act, the strategic i…