How many judgments cite S.R. Koshti v. CIT?

217 judgments on BharatTax cite S.R. Koshti v. CIT (276 ITR 165), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does S.R. Koshti v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 153C, Section 132, Section 132(4), Section 147.

S.R. Koshti v. CIT

276 ITR 165High Court2005#414 most cited

What is S.R. Koshti v. CIT authority for?

Tax authorities have an obligation to act in accordance with law and assist assessees who are over-assessed due to mistake, misconception, or lack of proper instruction, ensuring only legitimate taxes are collected.

217

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,357 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

S.R. Koshti v. CIT · assessment procedure · over-assessment · assistance to assessee · correct tax collection · authorities under the Act

Also reported as

146 Taxmann 335

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 153C Section 132 Section 132(4)Section 147 Section 131(1A)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assets section 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 158ba section 150 unexplained jewellery section 70 beyond four years section 18 statement under section 132(4)section 149(1)(b)

Judgments citing S.R. Koshti v. CIT

Indaco Jeans Private Limited, Goregaon East vs. I.T.O 6(3)(2), Aayakar Bhavan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide

ITA 79/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Ashwin ChhagFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…P a g e | 1 ITA Nos.79 & 80/Mum/2024 Indaco Jeans Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO-6(3)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, ITA Nos.79 & 80/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) Indaco Jeans Private Vs. ITO-6(3)(2) Limited, 510 Eco Star Room No. 503, 5th Floor, Vishweshwar Nagar Road, Aayakar Bhavan Goregaon East, M.K. Road, Maharashtra – 400063 Maharashtra – 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAKCS7348N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Ashwin Chhag Respondent by : H.M. Bhatt Date of Hearing 16.05.2024 Date o…

National Contracting Company (India), Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Circle-4(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 455/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.455/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-2021 ) National Contracting Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited, Income Tax, No.32, Palani Centre, Corporate Circle 4(1) Vaidyaraman Street, Chennai. Venkatanarayana Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan: Aaacr 8512M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Mukundan, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Mukundan, IRS, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 37Section 43B

…some reason or other; (b) Freely advise them when approached by them as to their rights and liabilities and as to the procedure to be adopted for claiming refunds and reliefs.” 14. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti Vs. CIT reported in 276 ITR 165 has held as under: 18. ‘’The position is, therefore, that, regardless of whether the revised return was filed or not, once an assessee is in a position to show that the assessee has been over-assessed under the provisions of the Act, regardless of whether the over-assessment is as are sult of assessee’s own mistake or otherwise, the CIT has the…

Ritika Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Vcentral Circle-4, New Delhi

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

ITA 430/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year 2013-14

For Respondent: Ms. Beenu, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 43B

…over assessed, the authorities under the Act 6 are required to ensure that only legitimate tax dues are collected. This is the view which flows form innumerable judgments including CIT vs. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC), S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), Ester Industries vs. CIT (2009) 185 TAXMAN 266 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). The essence of these decisions are that mere admission on the part of the assessee with respect to an addition/disallowance in its original return or in revised return would not ipso facto bar an assessee fr…

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Kota Baran Tollway Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 2025/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R

Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2025/Ahd/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Kota Baran Tollway Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 222, Advait Complex, Nr. Circle-2(1)(2), Sandesh Press Road, Ahmedabad Vastrapur, Ahmedabad [PAN No.AAECK2595B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR Respondent by: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R. Date of Hearing 25.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 30.04.2024 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This…

Shri R V Shah Charitable Trust, Bhavnagar vs. The Dy.DIT, CPC, Bengaluru Current Jurisdiction the ITO, Exemp., Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 257/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year : 2022-23 Shri R V Shah Charitable Trust The Dy. Director Of Income C/O. Madhu Silica Pvt.Ltd. Vs Tax, Cpc 147, Gidc, Vartej Bengaluru Bhavnagar 364 060 (Current Jao : Ito (Exempt), Gujarat Bhavnagar Pan: Aaets 0593 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri C. S. Sharma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Narendra Prasad Sinha: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Dated 19/01/2024 Passed By The Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai [“Jcit(A)” In Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Is A Charitable Trust & Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2022-23 On 17/10/2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,48,175/-. The Said Return Was Processed By Cpc Bengaluru U/S.143(1) Of The Act On 03/03/2023 & Income Was Determined At Rs.13,64,912/-. This Was Due To Denial Of Exemption U/S.10(23C) Of The Act By The Cpc. The Assessee Had Filed An

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri C. S. Sharma, Sr.DR

Section 10Section 10(23)(iv)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 246ASection 250

…n.com 550 (Guj) and in the case of the PCIT vs. UTI Bank reported at 398 ITR 514 (Guj). He further submitted that Assessing Officer was duty bound to determine the ‘correct income’ of the assessee, as held in the case of S.R. Koshti vs. CIT reported at (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj). ITA No.257/Ahd/2024. Shri R.V. Shah Charitable Trust vs. ITO Asst.year 2022-23 4 4. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, submitted that no claim for deduction u/s.11 of the Act was made in the return of income. The claim for deduction was made only u/s.10(23) of the Act. As the assessee had not filed the Form 10B, the CPC had rightly disallowe…

Dhanuka Agritech Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-2, New Delhi

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

ITA 1401/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to ensure that only legitimate tax dues are collected. This is the view which flows from innumerable judgments including CIT vs. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC), S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), Ester Industries vs. CIT (2009) 185 TAXMAN 266 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). The 4 essence of these decisions are that mere admission on the part of the assessee with respect to an addition/disallowance in its original return or in revised return would not ipso facto bar an assessee…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 76/AHD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, Ars

Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…the assessee has cited decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Amrapali Capital and Financial Services Ltd., ITA No.1836/Ahd/2011 wherein it was that taking note of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of S.R. Koshit Vs. CIT, 276 ITR 165 (Gj), which had held that the authority under the Act are under an obligation to act in accordance with law, and if a taxpayer under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed, is over-assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes due are collected. Based on this order o…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 73/AHD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, Ars

Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 52/AHD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, Ars

Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/AHD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, Ars

Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, Ahmedabad vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 315/AHD/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06 Vs. Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, The Income-Tax Officer, A-9, Kumud Apartment, Ward-5(2)(2), Near Stadium Five Roads, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Aaaab 3885 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 20.06.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “1. The Ld. Cit(A)-Nfac Erred On Facts & In Law In Deciding Appeal Ex- Parte Without Appreciating That Business Of The Appellant Has Been Closed Since Covid-19 & Therefore, In Absence Of Any Office, Notice(S) Claimed To Be Have Been Served Through Email Could Not Be Communicated To The Partners Of The Appellant. Without Prejudice To This It Is Submitted That No Notice(S) Came To Be Served On The Appellant At The Designated Email Stated In Form No. 35 For The Purpose Of Service Of Notice(S). Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv Vs. Ito Ay : 2005-06 2

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 234DSection 250Section 250(6)Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MRS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2005-06 Vs. Backbone Tarmet NG JV, The Income-tax Officer, A-9, Kumud Apartment, Ward-5(2)(2), Near Stadium Five Roads, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 PAN : AAAAB 3885 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sakar Sharma, CA Reven…

Appdynamics International Limited, Noida vs. ACIT Intl Taxation Circle 1(1)(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2413/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia-

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to ensure that only legitimate tax dues are collected. This is the view which flows form innumerable judgments including CIT vs. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC), S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), Ester Industries vs. CIT (2009) 185 TAXMAN 266 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). The essence of these decisions are that mere admission on the part of the assessee with respect to an addition/disallowance in its original return or in revised return would not ipso facto bar an assessee fr…

Bhailalbhai Mafatlal Pujara, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Mehsana

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 885/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.885/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2017-2018 Bhailalbhai Mafatlal Pujara, Income Tax Officer, 100 Sivam Gate, Vs. Ward-5, Dayanand Complex, Mehsana. Becharaji, Mehsana-384210. Pan: Aetpp7146K

For Appellant: Shri Suchit Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K Mangla, Sr. DR

Section 44ASection 69A

…ization period represent the business transaction to arrive at an opinion that the assessee has very meritorious case which could not be dismissed due to technical lapses as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti Vs. CIT reported in 276 ITR 165 where it was held as under: 20. A word of caution. The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee, under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed, is over-assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him…

Nitaben Rasikbhai Patel, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward- 1(3)(2) Now Ward-1(3)(1), Petlad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 687/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.687/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Nitaben Rasikbhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Moti Khadki At Sisva, Vs. Ward-1(3)(2), Ta Borsad, Now Ward 1(3)(1), Anand-388540. Petlad.

For Appellant: Shri B.T Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 50C

…ly because of non-cooperation from the side of the assessee. However, we are conscious of the fact that a meritorious case cannot be dismissed on account technical lapses as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti Vs. CIT reported in 276 ITR 165. The relevant extract of the judgment is as under: 20. A word of caution. The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee, under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed, is over-assessed, the authorities under the Act are…

Subhagya Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, CPC Bangalore Present Jurisdiction the ITO, Ward-5(2)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 858/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 858/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2018-2019 Subhagya Co-Operative Housing D.C.I.T, Society Limited, Vs. Cpc Bangalore B-701 Safal Pegasus, Present Near Auda Garden, Income Tax Officer, Prahladnagar, Ward-5(2)(4), Ahmedabad-380015. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aacas0740E

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, अहमदाबादनयायपीी IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ SMC’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 858/AHD/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2018-2019 Subhagya Co-operative Housing D.C.I.T, Society Limited, Vs. CPC Bangalore B-701 Safal Pegasus, Present Near Auda Garden, Income Tax Officer, Prahladnagar, Ward-5(2)(4), Ahmedabad-380015. Ahmedabad. PAN: AACAS0740E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.N. Divatia, A.R Revenue by : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR सुिवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 28/12/2023 घोरणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 05/01/2024…

Minor Haresh Karsanbhai Patel Oral Specific Deferred Family Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2) Now Ward- 5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is partly allowed

ITA 863/AHD/2023[1982-83]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2024AY 1982-83

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 863/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 1982-1983 Minor Haresh Karsanbhai Patel Oral Income Tax Officer, Specific Deferred Family Trust, Vs. Ward-5(2)(2), Nirma House, Ahmedabad. Near Income Tax Circle, Now Ashram Road, Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad-380009. Ward 5(3)(1), Ahmedabad Pan: Aaath4880P

For Appellant: Shri Hemanshu Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.D.R

Section 244A

…fering faced by the assessee in pursuing the matter at different stages, I am inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. 6.1 Besides the above, I note that the Hon’ble Gujarat Hight Court in the case of S.R. Koshti Vs. CIT reported in 276 ITR 165 has held as under: 20. A word of caution. The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee, under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed, is over-assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensur…

The United Theological College, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, (Exemptions), Ward-2, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 518/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Vargese, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Karthik, D.R

Section 11(5)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…able terms provides that no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law. Acquiescence cannot take away from a party the relief that he is entitled to where the tax is levied or collected without authority of law.” f) S.R. Koshti v. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj.) where the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that “18. The position is, therefore, that, regardless of whether the revised return was filed or not, once an assessee is in a position to show that the assessee has been over-assessed under the provisions of the Act, regardless of whether the over-assessment is as a result of assessee’s own mista…

Om Prakash Bishu, Kuchaman City vs. DCIT, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 107/JODH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Section 115BSection 133ASection 142ASection 142A(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR VIRTUAL HEARING BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM Sh. Om Prakash Bishnu Vs DCIT, Marwar Zanana Hospital, Jodhpur Ward No. 4, Hospital Road, Tehsil Kuchaman City, Nagaur (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AKKPB 3832 H Assessee By Sh. C. M. Agarwal, CA Revenue By Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of hearing 13/07/2023 Date of 18/08/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal is filed by assessee and is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Udaipur dated…

Shri Kenche Kumar, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 46/BANG/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Kenche Kumar, The Assistant Door No. 847, 21St Ward, Commissioner Of Bellary Road, Income Tax, Opp. Lucky Tyres, Hospet, Vs. Central Circle – Bellary – 583 201. 2(1), Pan: Avspk7166L Bangalore. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…otherwise. The Appellant wishes to place reliance on the following judicial precedents where it has been held that mere consent cannot confer jurisdiction. a. CIT Vs MRP Firm 56 ITR 67 (SC) b. Pullongode Rubber Vs State of Kerala 91 ITR 18 c. S.R Kosti Vs CIT 276 ITR 165 d. Nirmala L Mehta Vs CIT 269 ITR 1 e. Bhandari Metal & alloys Vs State of Karnataka 136 STC 292 The Appellant further submits that the learned Assessing Officer without appreciating the details as furnished during the course of assessment proceeding and further without appreciating the nature of the business of the Appellant has completely erred…

Prashant Chandra Sadh, Mumbai vs. ITO International Tax-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 619/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleprashant Chandrasadh, Ito,(Intltax),C4(2)(1), C-1804, Oberoi Woods, Room.No.1708, बनाम/ Off Western Express Air India Building, Vs. Highway,Goregaon East, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400063. Mumba-400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Biips5544N (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Soumendu Kumar Dash.DR

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 194ISection 68

…der the Act. If any assessee, under a mistake, misconceptions or on not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes due are collected" (see S.R. Kosti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165 1 (Guj.), CPA Yoosuf v. ITO [1970] 77 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi), 5 | P a g e ITA 619/Mum/2022 Prashant Chandra Sadh. Mumbai CIT v. Archana R. Dhanwatey [1982] 136 ITR 3552 (Bom.). We are attaching the sale agreement for sale of flat valued at Rs.61,00,000/- (Annexure B) and purchase ag…