Manoharlal v. Income-tax Officer

37 ITD 96Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#15722 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2023.

Judgments citing Manoharlal v. Income-tax Officer

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sanjeev Kumar, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3740/DEL/2013[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2023AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 1995-96] Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Vs Acit, C/O-Shri Hari Goel, Circle-37(1), Up-26, Pitam Pura, New Delhi. New Delhi-110088. Pan-Aekpg4102M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 1995-96] Dcit, Vs Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Circle-37(1), C/O-Shri Hari Goel, New Delhi. Up-26, Pitam Pura, New Delhi-110088. Pan-Aekpk3363A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr.Adv. & Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri H.K.Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2023 Order

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…cannot be a ground to make addition in the hands of the appellant: a) 67 TTJ 602 (Chd) Satpal Singh v ACIT b) 67 TTJ 411 (Chd) Rameshwar Lal Ahuja v ACIT c) 67 TTJ 471 (Chd) Pioneer Publicity Corporation v ACIT d) 66 TTJ 508 (All) Smt. Usha Tripathi v ACIT e) 37 ITD 96 [Jpr] Manohar Lal v ITO f) 69 ITD 336 (Mum} Jaya S Shetty v ACIT g) 72 ITD 155 (Mum) Smt Raja Rani Gupta v ACIT h) 70 TTJ 801 (Ahd) ITO v Manilal S Dave 12.5. I have considered the grounds raised in appeal and the submission of the AR. The argument that income of Mrs. Rekha Gupta is not income of appellant is not tenable, keeping in view the statem…

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2658/DEL/2013[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2023AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 1995-96] Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Vs Acit, C/O-Shri Hari Goel, Circle-37(1), Up-26, Pitam Pura, New Delhi. New Delhi-110088. Pan-Aekpg4102M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 1995-96] Dcit, Vs Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Circle-37(1), C/O-Shri Hari Goel, New Delhi. Up-26, Pitam Pura, New Delhi-110088. Pan-Aekpk3363A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr.Adv. & Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri H.K.Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2023 Order

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…cannot be a ground to make addition in the hands of the appellant: a) 67 TTJ 602 (Chd) Satpal Singh v ACIT b) 67 TTJ 411 (Chd) Rameshwar Lal Ahuja v ACIT c) 67 TTJ 471 (Chd) Pioneer Publicity Corporation v ACIT d) 66 TTJ 508 (All) Smt. Usha Tripathi v ACIT e) 37 ITD 96 [Jpr] Manohar Lal v ITO f) 69 ITD 336 (Mum} Jaya S Shetty v ACIT g) 72 ITD 155 (Mum) Smt Raja Rani Gupta v ACIT h) 70 TTJ 801 (Ahd) ITO v Manilal S Dave 12.5. I have considered the grounds raised in appeal and the submission of the AR. The argument that income of Mrs. Rekha Gupta is not income of appellant is not tenable, keeping in view the statem…

Shri Mukesh R.Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Circle-6, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3331/AHD/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jamesh Kurian, CIT-DR and Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 158BSection 250(6)

…nother Vs. ACIT 9 circumstances of the case and the denial of claim of loss, therefore of Rs.4,13,11,931/- was also not correct. The ld.counsel for the assessee relied on the following case laws in support of his contentions: Manoharlal v. Income-tax Officer, 37 ITD 96 (Jp) i) Prakash Narain vs.Commissioner of Income-tax And ii) Wealth-tax, 6 Taxman 159 (ALL) CIT Vs. Shakti Industries, 217 taxmann 77 iii) 12. Alternatively, the ld.counsel for the assessee pleaded that necessary direction be given for assessing the loss in the hands “SG” whose benami business it was found to be by the Revenue, being run in the na…

Shri Mukesh R.Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Circle-6, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2043/AHD/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jamesh Kurian, CIT-DR and Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 158BSection 250(6)

…nother Vs. ACIT 9 circumstances of the case and the denial of claim of loss, therefore of Rs.4,13,11,931/- was also not correct. The ld.counsel for the assessee relied on the following case laws in support of his contentions: Manoharlal v. Income-tax Officer, 37 ITD 96 (Jp) i) Prakash Narain vs.Commissioner of Income-tax And ii) Wealth-tax, 6 Taxman 159 (ALL) CIT Vs. Shakti Industries, 217 taxmann 77 iii) 12. Alternatively, the ld.counsel for the assessee pleaded that necessary direction be given for assessing the loss in the hands “SG” whose benami business it was found to be by the Revenue, being run in the na…

Shri Mukesh R.Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cent.Ward-1(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3487/AHD/2007[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jamesh Kurian, CIT-DR and Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 158BSection 250(6)

…nother Vs. ACIT 9 circumstances of the case and the denial of claim of loss, therefore of Rs.4,13,11,931/- was also not correct. The ld.counsel for the assessee relied on the following case laws in support of his contentions: Manoharlal v. Income-tax Officer, 37 ITD 96 (Jp) i) Prakash Narain vs.Commissioner of Income-tax And ii) Wealth-tax, 6 Taxman 159 (ALL) CIT Vs. Shakti Industries, 217 taxmann 77 iii) 12. Alternatively, the ld.counsel for the assessee pleaded that necessary direction be given for assessing the loss in the hands “SG” whose benami business it was found to be by the Revenue, being run in the na…

Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cent.Ward-1(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 736/AHD/2005[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jamesh Kurian, CIT-DR and Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 158BSection 250(6)

…nother Vs. ACIT 9 circumstances of the case and the denial of claim of loss, therefore of Rs.4,13,11,931/- was also not correct. The ld.counsel for the assessee relied on the following case laws in support of his contentions: Manoharlal v. Income-tax Officer, 37 ITD 96 (Jp) i) Prakash Narain vs.Commissioner of Income-tax And ii) Wealth-tax, 6 Taxman 159 (ALL) CIT Vs. Shakti Industries, 217 taxmann 77 iii) 12. Alternatively, the ld.counsel for the assessee pleaded that necessary direction be given for assessing the loss in the hands “SG” whose benami business it was found to be by the Revenue, being run in the na…