Mills (P.) Ltd., (2010) 4 ITR 29. (vii) Pushpanjali Dyeing & Printing Mills (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT

72 TTJ 886Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2001#25709 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Judgments citing Mills (P.) Ltd., (2010) 4 ITR 29. (vii) Pushpanjali Dyeing & Printing Mills (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

…and whatever is found correct on check leads to a very safe assumption that the rest is also correct. No assessee would hope that he can make correct and wrong entries on different dates and pray that only the correct ones are verified and not the others. iv) 72 TTJ 886 (Ahmadabad) Pushpanjali Dyeing and Printing Mills Private Limited v JCIT; v) 60 TTJ 27 (Indore) Prahladdas Hari Kishan vs. ACIT vi) 69 TTJ 685 (Patna) Income Tax Officer vs. Mangalam Chemicals vii) 52 TTJ 203 (Jaipur) ACIT vs. Rahmat Khan Chandan Khan & Party 16 It is also submitted that entries in service tax returns are determinative cannot be…

AVERY DENNISON (I) PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7183/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Avery Dennison (I) Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd., Circle -3(2), New Delhi P-24, Green Park Extension, New Delhi, Delhi Pan :Aaaca6163D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. & Sh. S.S. Tomar, Adv. Respondent By Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2018 Order

Section 144Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Avery Dennison (I) Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Ltd., Circle -3(2), New Delhi P-24, Green Park Extension, New Delhi, Delhi PAN :AAACA6163D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. & Sh. S.S. Tomar, Adv. Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 20.06.2018 Date of pronouncement 27.06.2018 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 31/10/2017 passed by the Deputy Commi…

ANKUR GOEL,KARNAL vs. JCIT, KARNAL

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

ITA 6213/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10 Ankur Goel, Jcit, Range Karnal, 2201/13, Urban Estate, Karnal. Vs. Karnal.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. C. Dandey, Sr.DR

…. CIT, (2005) 279 ITR 457. (iv) Harlal Hemraj vs. ITO, (1982) 14 TTJ 505. (v) Pandit Bros. vs. CIT, (1954) 26 ITR 159. (vi) DCIT vs. Paras Dyeing & Printing Mills (P.) Ltd., (2010) 4 ITR 29. (vii) Pushpanjali Dyeing & Printing Mills (P.) Ltd. vs. JCIT, (2001) 72 TTJ 886. He accordingly submitted that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) be deleted. 12. Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). He submitted that when the assessee has not maintained stock register as per quality, shape, colour, size etc., therefore, correct valuation of closing…

Mills (P.) Ltd., (2010) 4 ITR 29. (vii) Pushpanjali Dyeing & Printing Mills (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT (72 TTJ 886) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax