Rahumathulla v. ACIT

127 ITD 440Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#19005 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2018.

Judgments citing Rahumathulla v. ACIT

ROSHAN RAMDEO JAISWAL,GONDIA vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCIRCLE-8, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the assessee and the cross-objection of the assessee are disposed of in terms indicated above

ITA 313/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.K.M. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gitesh Kumar, Senior DR
Section 133A

…pal and section u/s 40A(3) is not attracted. Appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of Kerala High Court in case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. Vs. Asstt.CIT in ITA No.1742, 1759, 1761 to 1764, 1773 & 1780 of 2009 dt. 17.08.2010 and ITAT, Cochin Bench 127 ITD 440 (2011). I find that relationship of principal/agent is there and appellant is getting only commission out of it. Hence, there is no sale purchase and section 40A(3) is not attracted. Hence, addition on this account is deleted.” Aggrieved, both assessee and Revenue came in appeal before the Tribunal. 11. We have heard rival contentions and gone…

ACIT, CIR-8, NAGPUR vs. ROSHANLAL RAMDEO JAISWAL,, GONDIA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the assessee and the cross-objection of the assessee are disposed of in terms indicated above

ITA 225/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.K.M. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gitesh Kumar, Senior DR
Section 133A

…pal and section u/s 40A(3) is not attracted. Appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of Kerala High Court in case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. Vs. Asstt.CIT in ITA No.1742, 1759, 1761 to 1764, 1773 & 1780 of 2009 dt. 17.08.2010 and ITAT, Cochin Bench 127 ITD 440 (2011). I find that relationship of principal/agent is there and appellant is getting only commission out of it. Hence, there is no sale purchase and section 40A(3) is not attracted. Hence, addition on this account is deleted.” Aggrieved, both assessee and Revenue came in appeal before the Tribunal. 11. We have heard rival contentions and gone…

ACIT,CIR-8,, NAGPUR vs. SHRI ROSHANLAL RAMDEO JAISWAL,, GONDIA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is ordered to be dismissed

ITA 11/NAG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.K.M. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 44A

…of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT in ITA no.1742, 1759, 1761 to 1764, 1773 & 1780 of 2009 dated 17th August 2014 and also relied upon the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT, Cochin Bench, in the case of S. Rahumathulla v/s ACIT,[2010] 127 ITD 440 (Cochin). The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala and the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, have held that the relationship between the assessee and the BSNL is “principal and agent” in nature, therefore, the provisions under section 40A(3) has not been attracted and accordingly the learned Commissioner (Appeals) also deleted the addition made by the 5 Shri Rosh…

ASSTT.CIT,CIR-8, NAGPUR vs. PRAKASH RAMDEO JAISWAL, GONDIA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross

ITA 229/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.K.M. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(3)

…ition on the basis of the judgment passed in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd., v/s ACIT, dated 17th August 2014 and also relied upon the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in the case of S. Rahumathulla v/s ACIT, [2010] 127 ITD 440 (Cochin). The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala and the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, have held that the relationship between the assessee and the BSNL is “principal and agent” in nature, therefore, the provisions under section 40A(3) has not been attracted and, accordingly, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) also deleted the addition made by the Assessi…

Rahumathulla v. ACIT (127 ITD 440) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax