PCIT v. Kamla Devi Sharma

96 Taxmann.com 659Reported decision2018#18453 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 151

Issues it is cited on

section 292bbsection 292bsection 292section 29section 151section 133asection 131notice under section 148assistant commissionerundisclosed incomesection 139search and seizure

Judgments citing PCIT v. Kamla Devi Sharma

Arun Kumar Maurya, Lucknow vs. ITO-2(1), Lucknow

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

ITA 415/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 50CSection 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

…I.T.A. No.415/LKW/2023 Assessment Year:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.415/LKW/2023 Assessment year:2014-15 Arun Kumar Maurya Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income B-1/5, L-Park Mahanagar, Tax/ITO-2(1) Lucknow-226001. NFAC, New Delhi. PAN:ADZPM2830N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent by Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT (D.R.) O R D E R (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.415/LKW/2023 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 against impug…

Nikita Kapoor, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-54(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3875/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs Nikita Kapoor, Ito, Nfac, Delhi / C/O Raj Kumar & Ito, Ward 54(1), Associates, New Delhi L-7A (Lgf) South Extension, Parti-Ii, New Delhi – 110 049 Pan: Cgbpk7762C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 47Section 68Section 69C

…. He also submitted that there is a mandate that the income tax return should be filed within time, in compliance of the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act. In support of this contention, Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:- - PCIT vs Kamla Devi Sharma 96 Taxmann.com 659 (Rajasthan) dated 10.7.2024. - Bhaval Synthetics (India) Lted. Vs. DCIT {2020] 122 taxmann.com 310 (Jaipur-Trib) dated 28.10.2020. - Balbir Singh Vs. ACIT {2025} 171 taxmann.com 572 (Raipur Trib). - PCIT vs. Silver Line [2016] 65 taxmann.com 137 (Delhi) dated 4.11.2015. - PCIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders P Ltd. (2015) 64 taxmann.com…

Sunil Kumar Gattani, Jaipur vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 2, Jaipur

In the result ground no. 7

ITA 1142/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 115BSection 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, "B" JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठोड कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1142/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Sunil Kumar Gattani 2126, Gattani Bhawan Gangori Vs. Bazar 302001 बनाम ACIT, Central Circle-02, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ACSPG2461K अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / R…

Income Tax Officer, Ayakar Bhavan vs. Sukaniya Properties Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 3711/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah & Mitali Parekh, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R
Section 147Section 148Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3309/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Sukanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. B-306, Dynasty Business Park JB Nagar, Sangam Cinema Andheri East Mumbai - 400059 [PAN: AADCS9585J] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) Vs DCIT, Central Circle -3(4), Mumbai प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3711/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer, Ayakar Bhavan Vs अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) M/s. Sukanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. B-30…

M/S. Sukaniya Properties, Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle -3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 3309/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah & Mitali Parekh, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R
Section 147Section 148Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3309/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Sukanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. B-306, Dynasty Business Park JB Nagar, Sangam Cinema Andheri East Mumbai - 400059 [PAN: AADCS9585J] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) Vs DCIT, Central Circle -3(4), Mumbai प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3711/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer, Ayakar Bhavan Vs अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) M/s. Sukanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. B-30…

PCIT v. Kamla Devi Sharma (96 Taxmann.com 659) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax