Rakesh Singh v. ACIT

26 Taxmann.com 240Reported decision2012#6026 most cited

What is Rakesh Singh v. ACIT authority for?

A Commissioner is not justified in not admitting and adjudicating claims made by an appellant under sections 54B and 54F, especially when the Bangalore Tribunal's decision in Rakesh Singh v. ACIT (2012) is relevant.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Rakesh Singh v. ACIT · 26 Taxmann.com 240 · Section 54B · Section 54F · Commissioner's powers · ITAT Bangalore · claims adjudication

Judgments citing Rakesh Singh v. ACIT

Goa Minerals Private Limited, Vasco vs. ACIT, Circle - 2(1), Panaji

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

ITA 63/PAN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.63/Pan/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Goa Minerals Private Limited, The Assistant P.B.No.14, Salgaocar House, V Commissioner Of Income Dr.F.L.Gomes Road, S Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Vasco Da Gama, Goa. Goa – 403802 Pan: Aaacg 6716 C Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Veer Raghavan – Ar Revenue By Shri N. Shrikanth – Dr Date Of Hearing 09/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11/10/2023

Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ायपीठ पणजी, पणजीम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH : : PANAJI [VIRTUAL HEARING AT PUNE] BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.63/PAN/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Goa Minerals Private Limited, The Assistant P.B.No.14, Salgaocar House, V Commissioner of Income Dr.F.L.Gomes Road, s Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Vasco da Gama, Goa. Goa – 403802 PAN: AAACG 6716 C Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Veer Raghavan – AR Revenue by Shri N. Shrikanth – DR Date of hearing 09/10/2023…

Rakesh Singh v. ACIT (26 Taxmann.com 240) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax