What is PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer's failure to specify the exact limb (i.e., concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars) in the show-cause notice issued under Section 274 for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) vitiates the entire penalty proceedings.

How many judgments cite PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.?

185 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (432 ITR 84), spanning 2021 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 271(1)(c), Section 274, Section 143(3), Section 270A, Section 153A, Section 250.

PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (432 ITR 84)

Gautam Chadha L/H Mrs. Ratna Chadha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 28(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6910/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Narender Kumar Choudhry & Dr. Brr Kumar

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 37(1)Section 4Section 40A

…f non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and levy of penalty would suffers from non-application of mind. 6 GautamChadha L/H RatnaChadha Vs. ACIT 8.3 Even the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) while following the cases referred above, held as under: “21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notic…

Mercury Rubber Mills, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 36(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1548/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasadmercury Rubber Mills Vs. Acit A-112, Gujranwala Town Circle – 36(1) Part-1, Delhi – 110 009 New Delhi Pan No. Aaafm 8804 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. Revenue By Shri Jeetendra Chand, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 30.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.08.2022 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am :

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80I

…enalty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. 7. Learned DR, on the other hand, did not controvert the submissions made by the learned authorized representative but, however, submitted that the levy of penalty has to be seen after considering overall conduct…

Mohd. Jamal, Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 62(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8927/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. D. R

Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 275

…ng the charge for which notice was issued the penalty proceedings initiated were bad in law and consequently levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- i) PCIT Vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.); ii) CIT Vs. SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 taxmann.com 241 (Kar.); & iii) CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar.) 7. Referring to the above judgments, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the notices issued u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act did not specify the limb for which or the charge…

George Kutty, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3788/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] George Kutty, Vs Dcit, C/O-M/S. Oasis Tours India (P.) Circle-13(1), Ltd., C-40, Middle Circle, Dwarka New Delhi. Sadan, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aajpk4005H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Manish Malik, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 276CSection 68

…Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs GOA Coastal Resorts and Recreation Pvt. Ltd. [2021] 282 Taxman 463 (SC) and further placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT & Ors vs Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). 7.1. The Revenue has not pointed out from the record that any notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act specifying the particular charge was issued to the assessee. A notice dated 08.03.2013 has been placed on record by the assessee at page 39 of the Paper Book. For the sake of clarity, the same is reproduced herein below:- Date-08.03.2013 To, Sh…

Artmica Laminates P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed and the impugned penalty order is set aside

ITA 6615/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaartmica Laminates Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O. M.K. Bhatt & Co, 302, Ward-3(2), Triveni Complex, E-10-12, New Delhi Jawahar Park, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aqcpk7351E

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Bhatt, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…e does not disclose as to if the penalty has been levied for concealment of the income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In this context judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT Vs. Sahara Life Insurance Company Ltd (2019) 108 Taxmann.com 597 (Delhi) was relied. On merit it was also submitted that as assessment order was passed u/s 144 on the basis of estimate of profits therefore, there can be no case of concealment of income or submitting inaccurate particulars. Reliance in this regard was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Aero Traders (P) Ltd (20…

Aimil Pharmaceuticals (I) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2334/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, ld. ARFor Respondent: ShriAnujGarg, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 247Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…evant clause would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and levy of penalty would suffers from non-application of mind. 6.4 Even the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) while following the cases referred above, held as under: “21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notic…

Kalra Papers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 14(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 7649/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, Ld. CAFor Respondent: ShriAnujGarg, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…evant clause would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and levy of penalty would suffers from non-application of mind. 7.3. Even the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) while following the cases referred above, held as under: “21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notic…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 425/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 424/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 423/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 422/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 421/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 420/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 418/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 417/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…income. Therefore, the show cause notices are illegal and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2021] 432 ITR 84 (Del.). He, therefore, submitted that penalty is not leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. 12. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 13. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that no penalty is leviable in any of the assessment years under appeals. In assessment yea…

Sara Sae Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9058/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 9058/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years: 2008-09 Addl. Cit, Sara Sae Private Limited, बनाम Special Range – 8, E – 30, Basement, New Delhi. Anand Niketan, Vs. New Delhi – 110 021. Pan No. Aaacs6857L अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Jeetan Nagpal, C. A.; &For Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…g the charge for which notice was issued the penalty proceedings initiated were bad in law and consequently levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- i) PCIT Vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.); ii) CIT Vs. SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 taxmann.com 241 (Kar.); & iii) CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar.) 4. Referring to the above judgments, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the notices issued u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act did not specify the limb for which or the ch…

Triune Energy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-25(2), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 7553/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ani Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmatriune Energy Pvt Ltd, Vs. Dcit, B-1/H-4, Mohan Circle-25(2), Cooperative Indl. Estate, New Delhi Mathura Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs1045E

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…c) of the Act the notice was issued. On the other hand in the penalty order the ld AO has coined her own term “concealed income by furnishing inaccurate particulars.” 11. Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in case of PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (2021) 432 ITR 84 (Delhi) (HC).while deciding the identical issue held as under :- “21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the no…

Amar Nath Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5141/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Sahil Sharma, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Zahid Parvez, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 54Section 54F

…evant clause would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and levy of penalty would suffers from non-application of mind. 8.3. Even the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) while following the cases referred above, held as under: “21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notic…

Anack Sales Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-2(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7716/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudharyanack Sales Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit D-122, Defence Colony, Circle – 2(2) New Delhi-110 024 New Delhi

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…enalty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show- cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. 8. Learned DR, on the other hand, did not controvert the submissions made by the learned authorized representative but, however, submitted that the levy of penalty has to be seen after considering overall conduct…

Adesh Kumar Tyagi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC- 27, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5146/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudharyadesh Kumar Tyagi Vs. Acit C/O. Rra Tax India, D-28, Cc-27 South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110 049

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…enalty has been initiated i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He, therefore, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.(2021) 432 ITR 84 submitted that the show-cause-notice issued by the Assessing Officer were illegal and bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. 9. Learned DR, on the other hand, did not controvert the submissions made by the learned authorized representative but, however, submitted that the levy of penalty has to be seen after considering overall conduct…

PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

What is PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing PCIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

Gautam Chadha L/H Mrs. Ratna Chadha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 28(1), New Delhi

Mercury Rubber Mills, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 36(1), New Delhi

Mohd. Jamal, Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 62(1), New Delhi

George Kutty, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi

Artmica Laminates P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), New Delhi

Aimil Pharmaceuticals (I) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Kalra Papers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 14(1), New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Sara Sae Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 8, New Delhi

Triune Energy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-25(2), New Delhi

Amar Nath Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ghaziabad

Anack Sales Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-2(2), New Delhi

Adesh Kumar Tyagi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC- 27, New Delhi