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.

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 165)

Shri Prakashbhai Madhavjibhai Thummar, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), Rajkot

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

ITA 445/RJT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2010-11 Prakashbhai Madhvjibhai Income-Tax Officer, Thummar, Vs Ward 3(1)(2), “Dharti”, 10-Krishna Nagar, Near Rajkot Swaminarayan Chowk, Rajkot Pan : Aeipt 6588 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed, Am :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 250

…dered by the revenue and entire cash/cheque deposit has been added merely on the reasoning that the assessee failed to cooperate during the assessment proceedings. 9.1 We note that the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti Vs. CIT reported in 276 ITR 165 has held as under: Shri Prakashbhai M Thummar Vs. ITO AY : 2010-11 4 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…

Keshav Tirth Foundation, Rajkot vs. The CIT (E), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 137/RJT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12Section 12A

…he assessee has strong case. But the assessee has been deprived of the benefit of the exemption under section 11(1) of the Act A.Y.NIL on account of procedural lapses. We note that 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 a result of assessee’s own mistake or otherwise, the CIT has the p…

Young Women'S Christian Association of Delhi, New Delhi vs. ITO (Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1584/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Saten Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…under the circumstances enumerated therein. 6.3 The Ld. AR submitted that there is no estoppel against the statute and referred to the following decisions:- (i) CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. (1971) 81 ITR 303 (Del) (ii) SR Kosti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj) (iii) Nirmla L Mehta vs. A. Balasubramaniam 269 ITR 1 (Bom) 6.4 Reference was also made to the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in Srikant G. Shah vs. ITO (2007) 108 ITD 577 (Mum). 6.5 In support of the assessee’s case reliance was placed on the following decisions also:- (i) Kalvindee Rail Nirman (Engineers) Ltd. vs. CIT & Anothe…