How many judgments cite Parekh Bros. v. CIT?

21 judgments on BharatTax cite Parekh Bros. v. CIT (150 ITR 105), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Parekh Bros. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 153A, Section 153D, Section 147, Section 144A, Section 145(3).

Parekh Bros. v. CIT

150 ITR 105High Court1984#5578 most cited

What is Parekh Bros. v. CIT authority for?

The Department cannot take advantage of an assessee's ignorance, especially when a surrender is made solely to achieve peace and the assessee is not an expert in income tax matters.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Parekh Bros. v. CIT · 150 ITR 105 · 15 Taxmann 539 · CBDT Circular No. 14(XL-35)/1955 · ignorance of assessee · surrender to buy peace · tax expert · advantage of ignorance

Also reported as

15 Taxmann 539

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 153A Section 153D Section 147 Section 144A Section 145(3)Section 40A(3)Section 56(2)(vii)(b)

Issues it is cited on

section 135a section 148b section 139(9)section 142a prohibited by law section 40a(ia)section 269t stay petition section 253(3)section 135 section 149(1)(b)section 144a

Judgments citing Parekh Bros. v. CIT

DCIT 15(3), Mumbai vs. Kamdhenu Builders and Developers, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7010/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7010/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Dcit 15(3) Vs. Kamdhenu Builders & Matru Mandir, 1St Floor, Developers Tardeo Road, 20 Shanti Centre, Sector 17, Mumbai Vashi Navi Mumbai – 400 705 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aahfk 0461 E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rajneesh K. Arvind (Dr) ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : (I) Shri Sunil Pathak (Ar) (Ii)Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi(Ar) सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), For The Assessment Year 2007-08, In The Matter U/S.143(3)(Ii) Of The I.T. Act, Wherein The Following Three Grounds Taken Of The Assessee. (I) “On The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Assessee Is Entitled To Deduction U/S 80Ib (10) Of Rs.1,94,12,489/- Inspite Of The Fact That The Claim For Deduction Was Not Made In The Original Return & Was Only Made In The Return Filed, For A.Y. 2007-08, On 31.08.2009, Which Is Not A Valid Return In The Eye Of Law & Also Cannot Be Treated As „Revised Return‟ U/S. 139(5).” (Ii) “On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Deduction U/S 80Ib (10) Of Rs.1,94,12,489/-, As The Same Is Contrary To The Provisions Of Section 80A(5), Effective From 01.04.2003, Which Does Not Permit Allowance Of Deduction Unless The Claim For Deduction Is Made In The Return Of Income.”

For Appellant: (i) Shri Sunil Pathak (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajneesh K. Arvind (DR)

Section 10Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 80A(5)Section 80I

…he exemption under s.11, if not under s.10(23C). The department should not take advantage of the ignorance of the assessee as per the CBDT circular No.14 (XL-35)/1995, dated 11th April, 1955 quoted in Parekh Bros. vs. CIT & Ors (1983) 36 CTR (Ker) 372: (1984) 150 ITR 105 (Ker). Hence, it was the duty of the AO to ask information before completing the assessment under s. 143(3) of the Act. It may also be mentioned that the 7 tax audit report along with return is not a mandatory condition as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT cs. Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust (1992) 195 ITR 825 (Cal) as w…