Prabal Lakhotia v. ACIT

114 TTJ 938Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#12034 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Also reported as

25 SOT 71

Judgments citing Prabal Lakhotia v. ACIT

Shreepati Computer Centre, Muumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir-9, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 892/MUM/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…ding on the assessee, he is entitled to retract from the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchan…

Shreepati Computer Centre, Muumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir-9, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 891/MUM/2009[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchange Management Regulations, 2000/Exim Policy etc such…

Shreepati Computer Centre, Muumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir-9, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 890/MUM/2009[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…ding on the assessee, he is entitled to retract from the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchan…

Shreepati Computer Centre, Muumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir-9, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 889/MUM/2009[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…ding on the assessee, he is entitled to retract from the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchan…

ACIT Cen Cir-9, Mumbai vs. Shreepati Computer Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 1528/MUM/2009[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…ding on the assessee, he is entitled to retract from the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchan…

ACIT Cen Cir-9, Mumbai vs. Shreepati Computer Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 1527/MUM/2009[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…ding on the assessee, he is entitled to retract from the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchan…

ACIT Cen Cir-9, Mumbai vs. Shreepati Computer Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 1481/MUM/2009[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchange Management Regulations, 2000/Exim Policy etc such…

ACIT Central Circle-9, Mumbai vs. M/S. Shreepati Computer Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 1402/MUM/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Sinde, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Manju Nathaswami
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 80H

…ding on the assessee, he is entitled to retract from the same, if the assessee leads infallible evidence to show that the surrender was extracted by coercion or was made with a misunderstanding. Similar decisions were rendered in Prabal Lakhotia vs ACIT(2008) 114 TTJ 938(Jodh) and ITO vs Lanyard Foods Ltd(2008) 25 SOT 71(Mum)(URO). 7.4 In respect of the observations made by the Assessing Officer that LNSEL did not make any export, on careful consideration of the above facts and going through the copies of SOFTEX forms, I do not find any merit in the conclusion drawn by him. Under the provisions of Foreign Exchan…

Prabal Lakhotia v. ACIT (114 TTJ 938) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax