Pansari Gems International v. CIT

33 Taxmann.com 667High Court2013#24537 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 144BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 37Section 115BBESection 132Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

section 260section 260asection 30mercantile system of accountingcommercial expediencyprofits and gains of business or professionsection 145(3)section 145capital expendituresection 37(1)income-tax officerfirst appeal

Judgments citing Pansari Gems International v. CIT

Radhakishan Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 695/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

…en it had been found against any provision of law, then a case for formulation of any substantial question of law on such finding can be said to arise. Such is not the case here on facts." 16. This court in the case of Pansari Gems International v. CIT [2013] 33 Taxmann.com 667 (Raj.) has held as under : "The total turnover during the year under reference is Rs. 8.86 crores. The Income- tax Appellate Tribunal has held that gross profit rate does not depend on the basis of specification of item, but it depends upon the quality, shine, etc. The assessee has earned gross profit varied from 6.32 per cent. to 26.45 pe…

Radhakishna Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 694/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

…en it had been found against any provision of law, then a case for formulation of any substantial question of law on such finding can be said to arise. Such is not the case here on facts." 16. This court in the case of Pansari Gems International v. CIT [2013] 33 Taxmann.com 667 (Raj.) has held as under : "The total turnover during the year under reference is Rs. 8.86 crores. The Income- tax Appellate Tribunal has held that gross profit rate does not depend on the basis of specification of item, but it depends upon the quality, shine, etc. The assessee has earned gross profit varied from 6.32 per cent. to 26.45 pe…

M/S Kanak Vrindavan Resorts Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 543/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 37

…en it had been found against any provision of law, then a case for formulation of any substantial question of law on such finding can be said to arise. Such is not the case here on facts." 16. This court in the case of Pansari Gems International v. CIT [2013] 33 Taxmann.com 667 (Raj.) has held as under : "The total turnover during the year under reference is Rs. 8.86 crores. The Income- tax Appellate Tribunal has held that gross profit rate does not depend on the basis of specification of item, but it depends upon the quality, shine, etc. The assessee has earned gross profit varied from 6.32 per cent. to 26.45 pe…

Pansari Gems International v. CIT (33 Taxmann.com 667) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax