Marolia & Sons. v. CIT

129 ITR 475High Court1981#4517 most cited

What is Marolia & Sons. v. CIT authority for?

An assessee can raise a legal ground at any stage of proceedings, even without filing an appeal, to support an order that was decided against them, as per Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Marolia & Sons. v. CIT · 129 ITR 475 · Rule 27 ITAT Rules · raising legal ground · appeal stage · support order appealed against · respondent entitlement · respondent right to raise grounds

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 132ASection 153DSection 47(xiiib)(f)

Issues it is cited on

section 55(2)section 139(9)section 49fresh tangible materialsection 55section 47going concernvaluation of sharesfull value of considerationtransfer of capital assetindexed cost of acquisitionnon application of mind

Judgments citing Marolia & Sons. v. CIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. GAURAV DALMIA, DELHI

In the result, additional ground 1 under Rule 27 of the assessee is

ITA 4162/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…3 of 30 ITA No.4162/DEL/2025 [A.Y 2016-17] The Dy. C.I.T. Vs. Gaurav Dalmia proceedings, even though he may not have filed an appeal against such an order and relied upon the following the Judicial pronouncements: 1. 83 ITR 223 (Bom) (B.R.Bamsi v/s CIT) 2. 129 ITR 475 (All) (Moralia & Sons v/s CIT) 3. 220 ITR 398 (Ker) (CIT v/s Cochin Refinieries Ltd) 5. Opposing vehemently, the ld. counsel for the Revenue, with regard to Additional Ground No. 1, submitted that during the course of search and seizure proceedings conducted in the Dalmia Group, incriminating document i.e. a sheet named "Aexited" (Page No.14…

DCIT,CC-18, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. JAGAT AGRO COMMODTIES PV. LTD. , DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 1883/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Agarwal, Sr. Adv., Sh. Shailesh GuptaFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…ed proposition of law that the respondent is entitled to raise a legal ground at any stage of the proceedings even though he may not have filed an appeal against such order. The judicial pronouncement are as under:- 1. 83 ITR 223 (Bom) (B.R. Bamsi vs. CIT) 2. 129 ITR 475 (All) (Moralia& Sons vs. CIT) 3. 220 ITR 398 (Ker) 9CIT vs. Cochin Refinieries Ltd.) 4. 176 CTR 406 (Gau) (Assam Company (I) Ltd. vs. CIT) 5. 102 ITD 189 (Del) (ITO vs. Gurvinder Kaur) 6. 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT vs. Varas International P. ltd. 7. 149 Taxmann 456 (Guj) KharidVechanSangh Ltd. vs. CIT. 8. 397 ITR 282 (All) CIT vs. Jindal Polyster Ltd.…

DCIT,CC-18, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. JAGAT AGRO COMMODTIES PV. LTD. , DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 1882/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Agarwal, Sr. Adv., Sh. Shailesh GuptaFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…ed proposition of law that the respondent is entitled to raise a legal ground at any stage of the proceedings even though he may not have filed an appeal against such order. The judicial pronouncement are as under:- 1. 83 ITR 223 (Bom) (B.R. Bamsi vs. CIT) 2. 129 ITR 475 (All) (Moralia& Sons vs. CIT) 3. 220 ITR 398 (Ker) 9CIT vs. Cochin Refinieries Ltd.) 4. 176 CTR 406 (Gau) (Assam Company (I) Ltd. vs. CIT) 5. 102 ITD 189 (Del) (ITO vs. Gurvinder Kaur) 6. 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT vs. Varas International P. ltd. 7. 149 Taxmann 456 (Guj) KharidVechanSangh Ltd. vs. CIT. 8. 397 ITR 282 (All) CIT vs. Jindal Polyster Ltd.…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 25, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. SHRI BALAJI METAL TECH PVT LTD, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2167/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year 2013-14 Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Balaji Metal Tech Pvt. Ltd. Tax,Centralcircle-25, New Haryana 20/21B, 2Nd Floor, Fruit Garden Delhi Nit Faridabad, Haryana Faridabad Pan No. Aaqcs0136E Appellant Respondent Appellant Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Respondent Sh. Madhur Aggarwal, Advocate

Section 153C

…roposition of law that the respondent is entitled to raise a legal ground at any stage of the proceedings, even though he may not have filed an appeal against such an order. The Judicial pronouncements are as under: 1. 83 ITR 223 (Bom) (B.R.Bamsi v/s CIT) 2. 129 ITR 475 (All) (Moralia& Sons v/s CIT) 3. 220 ITR 398 (Ker) (CIT v/s Cochin Refinieries Ltd) 4. 176 CTR 406 (Gau) (Assam Company (1) Ltd v/s CIT) 5. 102 ITD 189 (Del) (ITO v/s Gurvinder Kaur) 6. 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT V. Varas International P.Ltd. 7. 149 Taxmann 456 (Guj) KharidVechan Sangh Ltd. vs CIT. 8. 397 ITR 282 (All) CIT vs Jindal Polyster Ltd. 5. The…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. RAMESH SHARMA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 6881/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Agarwal, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ed proposition of law that the respondent is entitled to raise a legal ground at any stage of the proceedings even though he may not have filed an appeal against such order. The judicial pronouncement are as under:- 1. 83 ITR 223 (Bom) (B.R. Bamsi vs. CIT) 2. 129 ITR 475 (All) (Moralia & Sons vs. CIT) 3. 220 ITR 398 (Ker) 9CIT vs. Cochin Refinieries Ltd.) 4. 176 CTR 406 (Gau) (Assam Company (I) Ltd. vs. CIT) 5. 102 ITD 189 (Del) (ITO vs. Gurvinder Kaur) 6. 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT vs. Varas International P. ltd. 7. 149 Taxmann 456 (Guj) Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. vs. CIT. 8. 397 ITR 282 (All) CIT vs. Jindal Polyster Ltd…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25 NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. FARIDABAD PRESSWELL PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the

ITA 2801/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2801/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Assistant Commissioner Of Faridabad Presswell Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Vs. 24, Ashoka Chamber, 5B, Central Circle-25, Room No.317, Rajindra Park, Pusa Road, 3Rd Floor, E-2, Ara Centre, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aaacfs815B Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250

…ed proposition of law that the respondent is entitled to raise a legal ground at any stage of the proceedings, even though he may not have filed an appeal against such an order. The Judicial pronouncements are under: 1. 83 ITR 223 (Bom) (B.R.Bamsi v/s CIT) 2. 129 ITR 475 (All) (Moralia & Sons v/s CIT) 3. 220 ITR 398 (Ker) (CIT v/s Cochin Refineries Ltd) 4. 176 CTR 406 (Gau) (Assam Company (I) Ltd v/s CIT) 5. 102 ITD 189 (Del) (ITO v/s Gurvinder Kaur) 6. 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT V. Varas International P. Ltd. 7. 149 Taxmann 456 (Guj) KharidVechan Sangh Ltd. vs CIT. 8. 397 ITR 282 (AH) CIT vs Jindal Polyster Ltd.” 2.2 T…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI vs. RAKSHIT BUILDCON PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4727/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Circle 19 (1), Vs. Rakshit Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., C – 1/207, 2Nd Floor, Delhi. Sector 11, Rohini, New Delhi – 110 085. (Pan : Aaecr2414E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi-23 [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 14.08.2024 For Ay 2017-18. “(I) "Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A), Has Erred In Not Appreciating That Detailed Investigation Was Already Carried Out By The Investigation Wing On The Issue Of Bogus Short Term Capital Loss From Alankit Group & The Assessee Was Not Able To Substantiate Its Claim With Evidences."

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151

…that the respondent is entitled to raise a legal ground at any stage of the proceedings, even though he may not have filed an appeal against such an order. In this regard, he relied on the following decisions :- (i) 83 ITR 223 (Born) (B.R.Bamsi vs. CIT) (ii) 129 ITR 475 (All) (Moralia & Sons vs. CIT) (iii) 220 ITR 398 (Ker) (CIT vs. Cochin Refineries Ltd) (iv) 176 CTR 406 (Gau) (Assam Company (I) Ltd vs. CIT) (v) 102 ITD 189 (Del) (ITO vs. Gurvinder Kaur) (vi) 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT V. Varas International P.Ltd. (vii) 149 Taxmann 456 (Guj) Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. vs CIT. (viii) 397 ITR 282 (All) CIT vs Jindal Poly…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. GURPREET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 940/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Section 132Section 153ASection 47Section 54F

…ar without filing an appeal can support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him as per Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules. The Judgments of various High Courts and the Tribunals are as under:- “i) 83 ITR 223 (Bom) B.R.Bamsi vs. CIT) ii) 129 ITR 475 (All) Moralia& Sons vs. CIT iii) 220 ITR 398 (Ker) CIT vs. Cochin Refineries Ltd. iv) 176 CTR 406 (Gau) Assam Company (I) Ltd vs. CIT v) 102 ITD 189 (Del) ITO vs. Gurvinder Kaur vi) 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT V. Varas International P.Ltd. vii) 436 ITR 616 (Bombay) Peter VazvsCIT In view of the above discussion and by following the settled principals of…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. GURMEET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 939/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Section 132Section 153ASection 47Section 54F

…ar without filing an appeal can support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him as per Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules. The Judgments of various High Courts and the Tribunals are as under:- “i) 83 ITR 223 (Bom) B.R.Bamsi vs. CIT) ii) 129 ITR 475 (All) Moralia& Sons vs. CIT iii) 220 ITR 398 (Ker) CIT vs. Cochin Refineries Ltd. iv) 176 CTR 406 (Gau) Assam Company (I) Ltd vs. CIT v) 102 ITD 189 (Del) ITO vs. Gurvinder Kaur vi) 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT V. Varas International P.Ltd. vii) 436 ITR 616 (Bombay) Peter VazvsCIT In view of the above discussion and by following the settled principals of…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. HARPREET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 938/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Section 132Section 153ASection 47Section 54F

…ar without filing an appeal can support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him as per Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules. The Judgments of various High Courts and the Tribunals are as under:- “i) 83 ITR 223 (Bom) B.R.Bamsi vs. CIT) ii) 129 ITR 475 (All) Moralia& Sons vs. CIT iii) 220 ITR 398 (Ker) CIT vs. Cochin Refineries Ltd. iv) 176 CTR 406 (Gau) Assam Company (I) Ltd vs. CIT v) 102 ITD 189 (Del) ITO vs. Gurvinder Kaur vi) 284 ITR 80 (SC) CIT V. Varas International P.Ltd. vii) 436 ITR 616 (Bombay) Peter VazvsCIT In view of the above discussion and by following the settled principals of…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD vs. PEAKWOOD REALITY PVT.LTD., GURGAON

ITA 89/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Cit Central Circle-Ii, M/S Peakwood Reality Pvt. Ltd., New Cgo Complex, Block- ‘B’, 3Rd Shop No. 6, 2Nd Floor, Jagdamba Vs. Floor, Nh-Iv, Faridabad, Palace, Near Gurgaon Dreamz Mall, Haryana-121001. Old Railway Road, Gurgaon-122001. Pan No. Aacce 1245 J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Gautam Jain (Virtually Present)For Respondent: Mr. R.A. Dhyani, CIT-DR

…nd submitted that ground raised by the assessee should and submitted that ground raised by the assessee should and submitted that ground raised by the assessee should be adjudicated:  83 ITR 223 (Bom) B.R.Bamsi vs. CIT) 83 ITR 223 (Bom) B.R.Bamsi vs. CIT)  129 ITR 475 (All) Moralia & Sons vs. CIT 129 ITR 475 (All) Moralia & Sons vs. CIT 129 ITR 475 (All) Moralia & Sons vs. CIT  220 ITR 3 220 ITR 398 (Ker) CIT vs. Cochin Refinieries 98 (Ker) CIT vs. Cochin Refinieries Ltd  176 CTR 406 (Gau) Assam Company (I) Ltd vs. 176 CTR 406 (Gau) Assam Company (I) Ltd vs. 176 CTR 406 (Gau) Assam Company (I) Ltd vs. CIT …

GUARDIAN NUTRITION & HEALTH SUPPLEMENTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 10(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6738/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…actual aspects, came to hold that the money utilised was from the borrowed funds. This essentially is an inference from factual aspects. (b) The conditions for allowing any claim of deduction u/ s 36(l)iii) has been outlined in Marolia & Sons vs CIT [ 1981 ] 129 ITR 475 (Allahabad) (Also see Hotel Roopa vs CIT [ 2015 ] 57 taxmann.com 331 (Karnataka)) in the following manner: It would be found from section 36(l)(iii ) that three conditions must be established by an assessee for getting the benefit under the aforesaid clause: (1) interest should have been payable, (2) there should be a borrowing, and (3) Capital…

ACIT, JAMMU vs. SH VIKRAMADITYA SINGH, JAMMU

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 269/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…ibhav Hotels (P) Limited in ITA No. 2638/ 2005 (High Court of Karnataka) ii. VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 389 ITR 326 (P & H) iii. B.R. Bamasi v. CIT 82 ITR 223 (Bom) iv. CIT v. Varas International (P) Ltd. 284 ITR 80 (SC) v. Marolia& Sons v. CIT 129 ITR 475 at page 480 (All) vi. CIT v.Cochin Refineries Ltd. 220 ITR 398 at page 407 (Ker) vii. CIT v. J. Vijaya Lakshmi 122 Taxman 649 (Mad) viii. Assam Company (India) Ltd. v. CIT 256 ITR 423 (Gau) 82 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Others, ix. ITO v. Smt. Gurinder Kaur 102 ITD 189 (Del…

ACIT, CIR-II, JAMMU vs. SMT. YASHORAJYA LAXMI, JAMMU

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 268/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…ibhav Hotels (P) Limited in ITA No. 2638/ 2005 (High Court of Karnataka) ii. VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 389 ITR 326 (P & H) iii. B.R. Bamasi v. CIT 82 ITR 223 (Bom) iv. CIT v. Varas International (P) Ltd. 284 ITR 80 (SC) v. Marolia& Sons v. CIT 129 ITR 475 at page 480 (All) vi. CIT v.Cochin Refineries Ltd. 220 ITR 398 at page 407 (Ker) vii. CIT v. J. Vijaya Lakshmi 122 Taxman 649 (Mad) viii. Assam Company (India) Ltd. v. CIT 256 ITR 423 (Gau) 82 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Others, ix. ITO v. Smt. Gurinder Kaur 102 ITD 189 (Del…

ACIT, JAMMU vs. DR KARAN SINGH, JAMMU

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 267/ASR/2007[1998-99\u005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005c]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…ibhav Hotels (P) Limited in ITA No. 2638/ 2005 (High Court of Karnataka) ii. VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 389 ITR 326 (P & H) iii. B.R. Bamasi v. CIT 82 ITR 223 (Bom) iv. CIT v. Varas International (P) Ltd. 284 ITR 80 (SC) v. Marolia& Sons v. CIT 129 ITR 475 at page 480 (All) vi. CIT v.Cochin Refineries Ltd. 220 ITR 398 at page 407 (Ker) vii. CIT v. J. Vijaya Lakshmi 122 Taxman 649 (Mad) viii. Assam Company (India) Ltd. v. CIT 256 ITR 423 (Gau) 82 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Others, ix. ITO v. Smt. Gurinder Kaur 102 ITD 189 (Del…

ACIT, JAMMU vs. SH M.K. AJAT SHATRU, JAMMU

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 263/ASR/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…ibhav Hotels (P) Limited in ITA No. 2638/ 2005 (High Court of Karnataka) ii. VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 389 ITR 326 (P & H) iii. B.R. Bamasi v. CIT 82 ITR 223 (Bom) iv. CIT v. Varas International (P) Ltd. 284 ITR 80 (SC) v. Marolia& Sons v. CIT 129 ITR 475 at page 480 (All) vi. CIT v.Cochin Refineries Ltd. 220 ITR 398 at page 407 (Ker) vii. CIT v. J. Vijaya Lakshmi 122 Taxman 649 (Mad) viii. Assam Company (India) Ltd. v. CIT 256 ITR 423 (Gau) 82 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Others, ix. ITO v. Smt. Gurinder Kaur 102 ITD 189 (Del…

M/S.MUTHOOT BANKERS,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 93/COCH/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10Section 14A

…ce of interest bearing fund. For this purpose, the Assessing Officer relied on the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. V.I. Baby & Co. 254 ITR 248 and the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Marolia & Sons vs. CIT 129 ITR 475. Section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act deals with the deduction on the amount of interest paid in respect of capita borrowed for the purposes of business or profession. It would be found from clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Act that three conditions must be established by the assessee for getting the benefit under the aforesaid…

M/S.MUTHOOT BANKERS,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 92/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10Section 14A

…ce of interest bearing fund. For this purpose, the Assessing Officer relied on the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. V.I. Baby & Co. 254 ITR 248 and the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Marolia & Sons vs. CIT 129 ITR 475. Section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act deals with the deduction on the amount of interest paid in respect of capita borrowed for the purposes of business or profession. It would be found from clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Act that three conditions must be established by the assessee for getting the benefit under the aforesaid…

JAYA HOSPITALAS, WARANGAL,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, WARANGAL RANGE, WARANGAL, WARANGAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 202/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 40

…ny borrowed funds was not contended either before the A.O. or before the CIT(A), hence that contention cannot be accepted. Learned Departmental Representative relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Marolia & Sons vs. CIT (129 ITR 475) and decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs. CIT (324 ITR 396). Learned Departmental Representative also relied on the recent decision of the ITAT in the case of GVK Airport Developers Limited (ITA No. 488/Hyd/2017, dated 05.07.2018) for the proposition that there is no commercial expediency.…

M/S. LIBERTY MARKETERS,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 86/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari , Am & George George K., Jm

Section 36(1)(iii)

…the decision of Madras High Court in the case of Milapchand R. Shah vs. CIT (58 ITR 525) and Roopchand Chanbildass & Sons vs. I.T.A. Nos. 409/C/2014 & 85&86/Coch/2016 CIT (63 ITR 166) and that of Allahabad High Court in the case of Marolia & Sons vs. CIT (129 ITR 475). Similar disallowance was made for the assessment year 2010-11 at Rs.24,37.980/- and for 2011-12 at Rs.27,93,606/-. 5. According to the CIT(A), if any amounts are used for non business purposes by the assessee, the same are to be disallowed u/s 36(1)(iii). Since in this case the three partners have made these drawings from the partnership fi…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2