Ryatar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit, Ranna Nagar, Timmapur v. ACIT

383 ITR 561Reported decision#17805 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 358,219 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2017.

Judgments citing Ryatar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit, Ranna Nagar, Timmapur v. ACIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli vs. M/S.Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank, Dharwad

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1567/BANG/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT(DR)-I
Section 263Section 40

…hand, the learned DR has contended that the issue on the merits regarding disallowance made under section 40(i)(a) is now covered in favour of the revenue by the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raytara Sahakari Niyamit reported in 383 ITR 561 which has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 81 Taxmann.com 43. Thus the learned DR has submitted that when the issue is covered in favour of the revenue then the disallowance made by the AO cannot be deleted. 4. Having considered the rival submissions and as well as relevant material on record, we find that the impugned assessments for…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli vs. M/S.Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank, Dharwad

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1566/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT(DR)-I
Section 263Section 40

…hand, the learned DR has contended that the issue on the merits regarding disallowance made under section 40(i)(a) is now covered in favour of the revenue by the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raytara Sahakari Niyamit reported in 383 ITR 561 which has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 81 Taxmann.com 43. Thus the learned DR has submitted that when the issue is covered in favour of the revenue then the disallowance made by the AO cannot be deleted. 4. Having considered the rival submissions and as well as relevant material on record, we find that the impugned assessments for…

Sri. E. Krishnappa, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 552/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Rao,CIT (D.R)
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH “ C ” BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.552/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Shri E. Krishnappa, Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Adakaramanahalli, Tax, Makali Post, Circle 7(2), Bangalore. 21st KM Nelamangala Taluk, Bangalore. PAN AFFPK 2791A Appellant Respondent. Appellant By : Smt. Pratibha, Advocate. Respondent By : Shri Sudhakar Rao,CIT (D.R) Date of Hearing : 2.1.2017. Date of Pronouncement : 17.2.2017. O R D E R Per Shri Vijay Pal Rao, J.M. : This appeal by the assessee is directed agai…

M/S Transpac Asia P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1039/BANG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-III (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 42A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘ C ’ BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. (T.P) A. No.1039/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2006-07) M/s. Transpac Asia Pvt. Ltd., No.150, 6th Main, IndustrialSuburb, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 058. …. Appellant. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C.A. Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-III (D.R) Date of Hearing : 25.07.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 11.8.2016. O R D E R Per Shri Vijay Pal Rao, J.M. : This appeal…

M/S Bellad & Company, Hubli vs. DCIT, Hubli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1002/BANG/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Bellad & Co., Vidyanagar, Hubli. … Appellant Pa No: Aabfb 6457 D Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Hubli. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri C.R.Nulvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.N.Bipin, JCIT(DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40a

…ver, we find that this ground was not raised before the CIT(A) and no application was filed for admission of the additional ground of appeal. Moreover, the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ryatar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit vs. ACIT (ITR (2016) (383 ITR 561) had not followed the ratio of the decision of the Special Bench of Tribunal in the case of Merilyn Shipping and Transport Ltd. and the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The Hon’ble High Court held as follows: “In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed by an…

Ryatar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit, Ranna Nagar, Timmapur v. ACIT (383 ITR 561) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax