PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo

415 ITR 334Reported decision#14184 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2023.

Judgments citing PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo

Suresh Productions, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as all the appeals and C

ITA 2105/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1429/Hyd/2014 Acit Circle M/S. Suresh 2003-04 13(1) Hyderabad Productions Hyderabad Co 78/Hyd/2014 M/S. Suresh Acit Circle 13(1) 2003-04 (Ita Productions Hyderabad 1429/H/2014) Hyderabad 2102/Hyd/2018 -Do- Addl.Cit, Range 13(Old) 2010-11 Range-14 (Present) Hyderabad 2103/Hyd/2018 -Do- Dy.Cit, Circle 14(1) 2012-13 Hyderabad 2104/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 2105/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…or the above proposition, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Nagari Mills Co. Ltd (33 ITR 681) (Bombay) ii) Berger Paints India Ltd (266 ITR 99) (pages 103-104) (S.C) iii) PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (2019 (415 ITR 334) (Bombay) iv) CIT vs. Excel Producer Ltd (358 ITR 295).(S.C) 21. The learned DR in his rejoinder submitted that the question of issue of notice u/s 143(2) does not arise since the assessee failed to submit the return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act. Further, the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer…

Suresh Productions, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as all the appeals and C

ITA 2104/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1429/Hyd/2014 Acit Circle M/S. Suresh 2003-04 13(1) Hyderabad Productions Hyderabad Co 78/Hyd/2014 M/S. Suresh Acit Circle 13(1) 2003-04 (Ita Productions Hyderabad 1429/H/2014) Hyderabad 2102/Hyd/2018 -Do- Addl.Cit, Range 13(Old) 2010-11 Range-14 (Present) Hyderabad 2103/Hyd/2018 -Do- Dy.Cit, Circle 14(1) 2012-13 Hyderabad 2104/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 2105/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…or the above proposition, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Nagari Mills Co. Ltd (33 ITR 681) (Bombay) ii) Berger Paints India Ltd (266 ITR 99) (pages 103-104) (S.C) iii) PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (2019 (415 ITR 334) (Bombay) iv) CIT vs. Excel Producer Ltd (358 ITR 295).(S.C) 21. The learned DR in his rejoinder submitted that the question of issue of notice u/s 143(2) does not arise since the assessee failed to submit the return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act. Further, the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer…

Suresh Productions, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as all the appeals and C

ITA 2103/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1429/Hyd/2014 Acit Circle M/S. Suresh 2003-04 13(1) Hyderabad Productions Hyderabad Co 78/Hyd/2014 M/S. Suresh Acit Circle 13(1) 2003-04 (Ita Productions Hyderabad 1429/H/2014) Hyderabad 2102/Hyd/2018 -Do- Addl.Cit, Range 13(Old) 2010-11 Range-14 (Present) Hyderabad 2103/Hyd/2018 -Do- Dy.Cit, Circle 14(1) 2012-13 Hyderabad 2104/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 2105/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…or the above proposition, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Nagari Mills Co. Ltd (33 ITR 681) (Bombay) ii) Berger Paints India Ltd (266 ITR 99) (pages 103-104) (S.C) iii) PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (2019 (415 ITR 334) (Bombay) iv) CIT vs. Excel Producer Ltd (358 ITR 295).(S.C) 21. The learned DR in his rejoinder submitted that the question of issue of notice u/s 143(2) does not arise since the assessee failed to submit the return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act. Further, the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer…

Suresh Productions, Hyderabad vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-13(Old), Range-14(Present), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as all the appeals and C

ITA 2102/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1429/Hyd/2014 Acit Circle M/S. Suresh 2003-04 13(1) Hyderabad Productions Hyderabad Co 78/Hyd/2014 M/S. Suresh Acit Circle 13(1) 2003-04 (Ita Productions Hyderabad 1429/H/2014) Hyderabad 2102/Hyd/2018 -Do- Addl.Cit, Range 13(Old) 2010-11 Range-14 (Present) Hyderabad 2103/Hyd/2018 -Do- Dy.Cit, Circle 14(1) 2012-13 Hyderabad 2104/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 2105/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…or the above proposition, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Nagari Mills Co. Ltd (33 ITR 681) (Bombay) ii) Berger Paints India Ltd (266 ITR 99) (pages 103-104) (S.C) iii) PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (2019 (415 ITR 334) (Bombay) iv) CIT vs. Excel Producer Ltd (358 ITR 295).(S.C) 21. The learned DR in his rejoinder submitted that the question of issue of notice u/s 143(2) does not arise since the assessee failed to submit the return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act. Further, the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer…

ACIT, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad vs. M/S Suresh Productions, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as all the appeals and C

ITA 1429/HYD/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1429/Hyd/2014 Acit Circle M/S. Suresh 2003-04 13(1) Hyderabad Productions Hyderabad Co 78/Hyd/2014 M/S. Suresh Acit Circle 13(1) 2003-04 (Ita Productions Hyderabad 1429/H/2014) Hyderabad 2102/Hyd/2018 -Do- Addl.Cit, Range 13(Old) 2010-11 Range-14 (Present) Hyderabad 2103/Hyd/2018 -Do- Dy.Cit, Circle 14(1) 2012-13 Hyderabad 2104/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 2105/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…or the above proposition, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Nagari Mills Co. Ltd (33 ITR 681) (Bombay) ii) Berger Paints India Ltd (266 ITR 99) (pages 103-104) (S.C) iii) PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (2019 (415 ITR 334) (Bombay) iv) CIT vs. Excel Producer Ltd (358 ITR 295).(S.C) 21. The learned DR in his rejoinder submitted that the question of issue of notice u/s 143(2) does not arise since the assessee failed to submit the return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act. Further, the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Prasad & Co. (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal and Cross Objection of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3646/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu,Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Charyc.O. No.299/Del/2016 (In Ita No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/S Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle – 13, W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacp4487H & Ita No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Income-Tax Officer, Vs. M/S Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Ward 19 (3), New Delhi. W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacp4487H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Goel, Cit Dr Assessee By: Shri Manoj Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 07.10.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 16.10.2019

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU,HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER C.O. No.299/Del/2016 (In ITA No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/s Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Central Circle – 13, W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACP4487H AND ITA No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Income-tax Officer, Vs. M/s Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Ward 19 (3), New Delhi. W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. PAN: AAACP4487H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR Assessee by: Shri Manoj Garg, CA Da…

M/S Prasad & Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal and Cross Objection of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3153/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu,Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Charyc.O. No.299/Del/2016 (In Ita No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/S Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle – 13, W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacp4487H & Ita No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Income-Tax Officer, Vs. M/S Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Ward 19 (3), New Delhi. W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacp4487H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Goel, Cit Dr Assessee By: Shri Manoj Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 07.10.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 16.10.2019

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU,HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER C.O. No.299/Del/2016 (In ITA No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/s Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Central Circle – 13, W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACP4487H AND ITA No.3646/Del/2016) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Income-tax Officer, Vs. M/s Prasad & Co. P. Ltd., Ward 19 (3), New Delhi. W-149, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. PAN: AAACP4487H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR Assessee by: Shri Manoj Garg, CA Da…

PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (415 ITR 334) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax