Nayantara G Agarwal v. CIT

310 ITR 56High Court2009#15602 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing Nayantara G Agarwal v. CIT

Prakasho Devi Saria, Siliguri vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Siliguri

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2360/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T. A No. 2360/Kol/2017 A.Y 2014-15 Prakasho Devi Saria Vs. Cit(A), Siliguri Pan: Agzpd611L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Lakhotia, ld.AR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…s view has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Workman of Associated Rubber Industries Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 77 (S.C) and in Ess Ess Kay Engg. Co.(P) Ltd. V CIT (1985) 15 ITR 636 (P&H). The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in Onam Agarbati Co. V Dy.CIT (2009) 310 ITR 56 (Ker) has held that though a tax payer may resort to a device to divert the income before it accrues to him, the effectiveness of advice depends upon its genuineness. The substance of the transaction has to be assessed by applying the taxing Statute so as to ascertain whether it is a sham or make-believe transaction or one which is genuine. 7 Pra…

Kamal Singh Kundalia, Siliguri vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(4), Siliguri

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2359/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15 Kamal Sinigh Kundalia V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Pradip Lakhotia, 2Nd Ward-1(4), Aayakar Floor, Metro Plaza, Sf Bhawana, Matigara, Road, Siliguri-734005 Siliguri-734010 [Pan No.Akupk 1029 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Dhiraj Lakhotia, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl-Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 07-02-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 08-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Siliguri’S Order Dated 29.08.2017 Passed In Case No.49/Cit(A)/Slg/2016-17, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. The Assessee’S Detailed Paper Book Comprising Of Bank Statement (For The Period Of 01.04.2011 To 31.03.2012), Share Certificate In This Taxpayer’S Name Dated 31.12.2011, Allotment Letter Of 15,000 Shares Of Cressanda Solutions After Due Approval Of Hon'Ble Bombay High Court Dated 21.02.2013, Show-Cause Notice, Demat Account With The Broker Firm & Contract Notes Etc.; Stands Perused.

Section 143(3)Section 68

…is view has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Workman of Associated Rubber Industries Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 77 (SC) and in Ess Ess Kay Engg. Co (p) Ltd. V CIT (1985) 15 ITR 636 (P&H). The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in Onam Agarbati Co. V Dy.cit (2009) 310 ITR 56 (Ker) has held that though a taxpayer may resort to a device to divert the income before it accrues to him, the effectiveness of advice depends upon its genuineness. The substance of the transactions has to be assessed by applying the taxing Statute so as to ascertain whether it is a sham or make-believe transactions or one which is genuine. 14. L…

Shri Yogendra Khandelwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, ground no. 4

ITA 906/JPR/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev SoganiFor Respondent: Shri R. A. Verma (Addl. CIT)
Section 40ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80E

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; ikWy jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 906/JP/2012 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 Shri Yogendra Khandelwal cuke Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. Prop. M/s Steel Syndicate of Income Tax, Circle-3, 1st India, Floor, Somani Jaipur Building, S.C. Link Road, Loha Mandi, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADCPK0822B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 88…

Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4592/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…R in defense of his arguments relied upon the series of decisions as under : i) McDowell and Co Ltd -154 ITR 148 (SC); ii) Twinstar Holdings Ltd V/s DCIT – 260 ITR 0006 (Bom); iii) Nayantara G Agarwal V/s CIT -207 ITR 639 (Bom); iv) Onam Agarbathi Co V/s DCIT-310 ITR 56 (Kar); v) Pravinbhai M Kheni V/s ACIT -28 taxmann.com 111(Guj); vi) CIT V/s Rothman Cycle Ind. Pvt.Ltd (2011) 203 taxman 302; vii) CIT V/s Bharti Devi Sarabhi -231 ITR 526 (SC); viii) Moti Trust Kota vs Commr. Of Income Tax, 1999 236 ITR 37 SC, The ld. DR filed detailed written submissions and finally prayed before the Bench in view of the facts…

Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4591/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…R in defense of his arguments relied upon the series of decisions as under : i) McDowell and Co Ltd -154 ITR 148 (SC); ii) Twinstar Holdings Ltd V/s DCIT – 260 ITR 0006 (Bom); iii) Nayantara G Agarwal V/s CIT -207 ITR 639 (Bom); iv) Onam Agarbathi Co V/s DCIT-310 ITR 56 (Kar); v) Pravinbhai M Kheni V/s ACIT -28 taxmann.com 111(Guj); vi) CIT V/s Rothman Cycle Ind. Pvt.Ltd (2011) 203 taxman 302; vii) CIT V/s Bharti Devi Sarabhi -231 ITR 526 (SC); viii) Moti Trust Kota vs Commr. Of Income Tax, 1999 236 ITR 37 SC, The ld. DR filed detailed written submissions and finally prayed before the Bench in view of the facts…

ACIT 21(2), Mumbai vs. Kiran Aggarwal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1055/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…R in defense of his arguments relied upon the series of decisions as under : i) McDowell and Co Ltd -154 ITR 148 (SC); ii) Twinstar Holdings Ltd V/s DCIT – 260 ITR 0006 (Bom); iii) Nayantara G Agarwal V/s CIT -207 ITR 639 (Bom); iv) Onam Agarbathi Co V/s DCIT-310 ITR 56 (Kar); v) Pravinbhai M Kheni V/s ACIT -28 taxmann.com 111(Guj); vi) CIT V/s Rothman Cycle Ind. Pvt.Ltd (2011) 203 taxman 302; vii) CIT V/s Bharti Devi Sarabhi -231 ITR 526 (SC); viii) Moti Trust Kota vs Commr. Of Income Tax, 1999 236 ITR 37 SC, The ld. DR filed detailed written submissions and finally prayed before the Bench in view of the facts…

Nayantara G Agarwal v. CIT (310 ITR 56) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax