Manish Prakash Gupta v. CIT

68 DTR 112High Court2012#21348 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 2(7)section 45(2)section 145(1)section 14(1)section 211section 2(47)(v)section 145(2)section 52section 53aproject completion methodsection 53section 34(1)

Judgments citing Manish Prakash Gupta v. CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 544/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…&H) 146 Taxmann 701 • Spice Infotainment Ltd., vs CIT 247 CTR 500 (Delhi) • Nawal kishore & Sons Jewellers v/s. CIT [(2012) 79 DTR (All) 241] • CITvs.Bihari Lal Agarwal [(2012) 346 ITR 67 (All)] [(2012) 68 DTR (All) 112 • Manish Prakash Gupta v/s. CIT [(2012) 68 DTR 112 (All) • ACIT v/s. Supreme Appar and Associates [(2009) 30 DTR (Mum) (Trib) 229] ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 96 of 96 • ITO v. Aligarh Auto Centre [(2013) 83 DTR (Agra) (Trib) 13. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the legal issue which has been…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 543/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…&H) 146 Taxmann 701 • Spice Infotainment Ltd., vs CIT 247 CTR 500 (Delhi) • Nawal kishore & Sons Jewellers v/s. CIT [(2012) 79 DTR (All) 241] • CITvs.Bihari Lal Agarwal [(2012) 346 ITR 67 (All)] [(2012) 68 DTR (All) 112 • Manish Prakash Gupta v/s. CIT [(2012) 68 DTR 112 (All) • ACIT v/s. Supreme Appar and Associates [(2009) 30 DTR (Mum) (Trib) 229] ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 96 of 96 • ITO v. Aligarh Auto Centre [(2013) 83 DTR (Agra) (Trib) 13. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the legal issue which has been…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…&H) 146 Taxmann 701 • Spice Infotainment Ltd., vs CIT 247 CTR 500 (Delhi) • Nawal kishore & Sons Jewellers v/s. CIT [(2012) 79 DTR (All) 241] • CITvs.Bihari Lal Agarwal [(2012) 346 ITR 67 (All)] [(2012) 68 DTR (All) 112 • Manish Prakash Gupta v/s. CIT [(2012) 68 DTR 112 (All) • ACIT v/s. Supreme Appar and Associates [(2009) 30 DTR (Mum) (Trib) 229] ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 96 of 96 • ITO v. Aligarh Auto Centre [(2013) 83 DTR (Agra) (Trib) 13. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the legal issue which has been…

SMT. ANITA KUMARI,PROP M/S HARRE KRISHANA CHEMICAL,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5184/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2007-08 Smt. Anita Kumari Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/S Hare Krishna Vs. Ward 1(1), Chemcial, Ghaziabad C-118, Vardhman Apartment-Iv, Shalimar Garden, Extension-Ii, Ghaziabad (Pan: (Appellant) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Respondent) (Respondent) (Respondent) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…Ltd. reported in 224 Taxmann 203 (Guj.). - Decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bihari Lal Agarwal reported in 346 ITR 67 (All.) - Decision of Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Manish Prakash Gupta vs. CIT reported in 68 DTR 112 (All.) - Decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of ACIT vs. Geno Pharmaceuticals Ltd. reported in 214 Taxmann 83 (Bom.) - Decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of DCIT vs. Silver Line in ITA No. 1809, 1504, 1505 and 1506/Del/2013. - Decision of Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma reported in 336 ITR 678.…

Manish Prakash Gupta v. CIT (68 DTR 112) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax