Mariam Aysha v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax

104 ITR 381High Court#8302 most cited
13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Judgments citing Mariam Aysha v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. M.N. SECURITIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3833/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…laced on the following case laws: " L. R. Gupta Vs UOI 194 ITR 32 (Del.) " Ramesh Chander Vs CIT, Punjab & Ors 93 ITR 244 (P&H) " Moti Lal and Ors. Vs Preventive Intelligence Officer, Central Excise and Customs Agra 80 ITR 418 (All) " Om Parkash Jindal Vs UOI 104 ITR 381 (P&H) " Auto Finance (P) Ltd. 300 ITR 83 (Del.) " Manish Maheshwari Vs ACIT 289 ITR 341 (SC) " Saraya Industries Ltd. Vs UOI 306 ITR 189 (Del.) " Sinhgad Technical Education Society Vs ACIT 140 TTJ 233 (Pune) " All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs DCIT 137 ITD 287 (Mum) " CIT Vs Chetan Das Lachman Das 254 CTR 392 (Del) " CIT Vs Anil Bhatia 211 Taxm…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. M.N. SECURITIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3832/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…laced on the following case laws: " L. R. Gupta Vs UOI 194 ITR 32 (Del.) " Ramesh Chander Vs CIT, Punjab & Ors 93 ITR 244 (P&H) " Moti Lal and Ors. Vs Preventive Intelligence Officer, Central Excise and Customs Agra 80 ITR 418 (All) " Om Parkash Jindal Vs UOI 104 ITR 381 (P&H) " Auto Finance (P) Ltd. 300 ITR 83 (Del.) " Manish Maheshwari Vs ACIT 289 ITR 341 (SC) " Saraya Industries Ltd. Vs UOI 306 ITR 189 (Del.) " Sinhgad Technical Education Society Vs ACIT 140 TTJ 233 (Pune) " All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs DCIT 137 ITD 287 (Mum) " CIT Vs Chetan Das Lachman Das 254 CTR 392 (Del) " CIT Vs Anil Bhatia 211 Taxm…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. KAYCEE DISTILLERIES, THIRUSSUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 2713/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CITFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

…material on record. In our opinion, the very assessment has to be made as per law. The consent given by the assessee cannot give the right to the AO to make addition, as held by the judgment in the case 13 I.T.A. Nos.2711-2713/M/16 of Mariam Aysha v. CA IT (104 ITR 381), the consent cannot be a reason to sustain the addition .... In our opinion, the assessee is having the right of appeal even it is agreed to addition before the AO. Due to paucity of time, the assessee could not produce the material. Now the evidence is available regarding this expenditure before the assessee and it requires to be examined by th…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. KAYCEE DISTILLERIES, THIRUSSUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 2712/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CITFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

…material on record. In our opinion, the very assessment has to be made as per law. The consent given by the assessee cannot give the right to the AO to make addition, as held by the judgment in the case 13 I.T.A. Nos.2711-2713/M/16 of Mariam Aysha v. CA IT (104 ITR 381), the consent cannot be a reason to sustain the addition .... In our opinion, the assessee is having the right of appeal even it is agreed to addition before the AO. Due to paucity of time, the assessee could not produce the material. Now the evidence is available regarding this expenditure before the assessee and it requires to be examined by th…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. KAYCEE DISTILLERIES, THIRUSSUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 2711/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CITFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

…material on record. In our opinion, the very assessment has to be made as per law. The consent given by the assessee cannot give the right to the AO to make addition, as held by the judgment in the case 13 I.T.A. Nos.2711-2713/M/16 of Mariam Aysha v. CA IT (104 ITR 381), the consent cannot be a reason to sustain the addition .... In our opinion, the assessee is having the right of appeal even it is agreed to addition before the AO. Due to paucity of time, the assessee could not produce the material. Now the evidence is available regarding this expenditure before the assessee and it requires to be examined by th…

V.R.VENKAATACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2639/CHNY/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012)

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी च"ला नागे"" "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012) V.R. Venkatachalam, The Assistant Commissioner of No.25, Sir C.V. Raman Road, Vs Income Tax, Alwarpet, Central Circle I(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai [PAN: AADPV 3203H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"…

V.R.VENKAATACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2638/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012)

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी च"ला नागे"" "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012) V.R. Venkatachalam, The Assistant Commissioner of No.25, Sir C.V. Raman Road, Vs Income Tax, Alwarpet, Central Circle I(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai [PAN: AADPV 3203H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"…

V.R.VENKAATACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2637/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012)

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी च"ला नागे"" "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012) V.R. Venkatachalam, The Assistant Commissioner of No.25, Sir C.V. Raman Road, Vs Income Tax, Alwarpet, Central Circle I(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai [PAN: AADPV 3203H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"…

V.R.VENKAATACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2636/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012)

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी च"ला नागे"" "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012) V.R. Venkatachalam, The Assistant Commissioner of No.25, Sir C.V. Raman Road, Vs Income Tax, Alwarpet, Central Circle I(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai [PAN: AADPV 3203H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"…

V.R.VENKAATACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2635/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012)

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी च"ला नागे"" "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012) V.R. Venkatachalam, The Assistant Commissioner of No.25, Sir C.V. Raman Road, Vs Income Tax, Alwarpet, Central Circle I(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai [PAN: AADPV 3203H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"…

V.R.VENKAATACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2634/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012)

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी च"ला नागे"" "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2634, 2635, 2636, 2637, 2638 & 2639/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-2012) V.R. Venkatachalam, The Assistant Commissioner of No.25, Sir C.V. Raman Road, Vs Income Tax, Alwarpet, Central Circle I(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai [PAN: AADPV 3203H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"…

PINCESON JOSE,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2749/CHNY/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2015AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2739, 2740 & 2741/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-2008, 2008--2009)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Krishnamurthy, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 68Section 69ASection 88C

…ned. Even if the assessee agreed at the time of assessment, these additions cannot be legally sustainable. For this proposition, the ld. Authorised Representative for assessees relied on the judgment of Madras high court in the case of Mariam Aysha vs. CIT 104 ITR 381 wherein it is held that consent of the assessee cannot give jurisdiction to Assessing I.T.A.Nos. 2739 to 2749/Mds/2014 :- 7 -: Officer and the taxing authorities can act only if there is power under the statute to do so. He further relied on the order of the co-ordinate bench in ITA Nos.559,560, 561, 562, 563 & 564/Mds/2014 for the assessment…

JOSEPH PRINCE,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2739/CHNY/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2015AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.2739, 2740 & 2741/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-2008, 2008--2009)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Krishnamurthy, IRS, CIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 68Section 69ASection 88C

…ned. Even if the assessee agreed at the time of assessment, these additions cannot be legally sustainable. For this proposition, the ld. Authorised Representative for assessees relied on the judgment of Madras high court in the case of Mariam Aysha vs. CIT 104 ITR 381 wherein it is held that consent of the assessee cannot give jurisdiction to Assessing I.T.A.Nos. 2739 to 2749/Mds/2014 :- 7 -: Officer and the taxing authorities can act only if there is power under the statute to do so. He further relied on the order of the co-ordinate bench in ITA Nos.559,560, 561, 562, 563 & 564/Mds/2014 for the assessment…