Ranglal Bagaria HUF v. ACIT

384 ITR 477High Court2016#20699 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 12Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(b)/(g)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Judgments citing Ranglal Bagaria HUF v. ACIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Global Institute of Technology Society, Jaipur Rajasthan

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 175/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, (Addl.CIT)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147

…ecessary for its assessment. Further reasons recorded by the AO for issue of notice under section 148 of the Act were not clear which primary facts were suppressed by the appellant. The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Rangalal Bagaria (HUF) vs ACIT 384 ITR 477(Cal) held that if the reasons do not indicate that any material fact relevant for the assessment had been suppressed of that any false assertion on the part of the assessee discovered a reassessment on the relevant ground can not be undertaken. Furthermore, The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bharati Infratri Ltd vs DCIT held that where p…

Mohan Kumar Roy, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 29(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 104/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254Section 68

…resent case there has not been any non-disclosure of material fact on the part of the assessee. Therefore, the re-opening of assessment is bad in law. Ld. A/R in defence of his argument relied on the decision of Ranglal Bagaria HUF Vs. ACIT reported in [2016] 384 ITR 477 (Calcutta). A/R also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT Vs. CEAT Ltd. reported in [2022] 449 ITR 171 (SC). Ld. A/R pointed out that in the case before the Hon'ble Apex Court the issue was whether the notice issued after a period of four years after relevant assessment year where the assessment has been framed u/s 143…

Mohan Kumar Roy, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 29(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 103/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254Section 68

…resent case there has not been any non-disclosure of material fact on the part of the assessee. Therefore, the re-opening of assessment is bad in law. Ld. A/R in defence of his argument relied on the decision of Ranglal Bagaria HUF Vs. ACIT reported in [2016] 384 ITR 477 (Calcutta). A/R also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT Vs. CEAT Ltd. reported in [2022] 449 ITR 171 (SC). Ld. A/R pointed out that in the case before the Hon'ble Apex Court the issue was whether the notice issued after a period of four years after relevant assessment year where the assessment has been framed u/s 143…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Superior Films (P) Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed; accordingly, Revenue’s appeal is

ITA 4938/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gurjit Batra and Shri S.M. Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. Dr
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Page 9 of 29 FIT FOR PUBLICATION (ANM) (BS) ITA No.- 4938/Del/2012. (AM) (JM) M/s Superior Films Pvt. Ltd. 33. CIT vs. Central Warehousing Corpn. Ltd. 382 ITR 172(Delhi) 34. Priya Desh Gupta vs. DCIT 385 ITR 452 (Delhi) 35. Ranglal Bagaria (HUF) vs. ACIT 384 ITR 477 (Cal.) 36. Director of Income Tax International Taxation-II vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Limited in ITA No. 1058 /Del/2011 (Delhi) (2.4) The relevant portions of written submissions filed from assessee’s side as well as from the side of Revenue are reproduced as under: Written submissions from the assessee’s side: “The appellant com…

Ranglal Bagaria HUF v. ACIT (384 ITR 477) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax