Pankaj Dahyabhai Patel (Huf) v. Asstt. CIT M9991

63 TTJ 790Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1999#25402 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing Pankaj Dahyabhai Patel (Huf) v. Asstt. CIT M9991

The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2)., Ahmedabad vs. Pawan Satynarayan Jalan, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 204/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

…Poddar [19921 41 ITD 449 fCal.): - S.K. Gupta v. Dy.CIT [1999] 63 TTJ (Delhi) 532; - Satnam Singh Chhabra v. Dy. CIT [20021 74 TTJ (Lucknow) 976: - CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal [20071162 Taxman 3/293 ITR 43 (Delhi): - Pankaj Dahyabhai Patel (Huf) v. Asstt. CIT M9991 63 TTJ 790 (Ahd.): - N.K. Malhan v. Dy. CIT [2005] 91 TTJ (Delhi) 938; - Pr. CIT v. Ajanta Footcare (India) (P.) Ltd. [20171 84 taxmann.com 109fCal.): - Dy. CIT v. C, Krishna Yadav f20111 12 taxmann.com 4/T20111 46 SOT250(Hvd.)(URO); - Harish Textile Engineers Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [20151 63 taxmanrLCom 66/379 ITR 160/r2016] 236 Taxman 420(Bom): - CIT v. Jai Pal A…

Pawan Satynarayan Jalan, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2)., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 182/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

…Poddar [19921 41 ITD 449 fCal.): - S.K. Gupta v. Dy.CIT [1999] 63 TTJ (Delhi) 532; - Satnam Singh Chhabra v. Dy. CIT [20021 74 TTJ (Lucknow) 976: - CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal [20071162 Taxman 3/293 ITR 43 (Delhi): - Pankaj Dahyabhai Patel (Huf) v. Asstt. CIT M9991 63 TTJ 790 (Ahd.): - N.K. Malhan v. Dy. CIT [2005] 91 TTJ (Delhi) 938; - Pr. CIT v. Ajanta Footcare (India) (P.) Ltd. [20171 84 taxmann.com 109fCal.): - Dy. CIT v. C, Krishna Yadav f20111 12 taxmann.com 4/T20111 46 SOT250(Hvd.)(URO); - Harish Textile Engineers Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [20151 63 taxmanrLCom 66/379 ITR 160/r2016] 236 Taxman 420(Bom): - CIT v. Jai Pal A…

JCIT (OSD) Cen Cir 39, Mumbai vs. Krupa Land Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 604/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm The Jt. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Krupa Land Limited Income Tax (Osd), Cc-39 11, B-Wing, Mittal Towers Mumbai Free Press Journal Marg R.No.32(1), Ground Floor Nariman Point Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aadck1521E Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

…203 (Delhi) d) N.R.Malhan v. DCIT (2004) 91 TTJ 908 (Delhi) e) Amarjit Singh Baxi v. ACIT (2004) 263 ITR (AT) 75 f) ACIT v. Ashokkumar Vig (2008) 15 SOT 85 (Ranchi) g) MM Financiers v. DCIT (2007) 17 SOT 5 (Chennal) h) Pankaj Dayabhai Patel HUF v. ACIT (1999) 63 TTJ 790 (Ahd.) I) Radhe Developers (2010) 329 ITR 1 (Guj). j) Shri Kapidev vs. JCIT (Spl. Range, Delhi) ITA No.2259/Del/2002/A.Y. 1997-98 dated 22.03.2012. It is evident that the addition of Rs.38.45 crore and Rs.5.01 crore is based only on conjectures and surmises. There is no corroborative evidence on record to prove that the appellant has actually incu…

Pankaj Dahyabhai Patel (Huf) v. Asstt. CIT M9991 (63 TTJ 790) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax