What is Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT authority for?

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

How many judgments cite Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT?

460 judgments on BharatTax cite Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT (316 ITR 274), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153A, Section 68, Section 131, Section 133A, Section 115BBE, Section 153C.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT (316 ITR 274)

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 66/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 8.17 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 65/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 8.17 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 64/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 8.17 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 63/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 8.17 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 62/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 8.17 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 134/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 6.12 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 133/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 6.12 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 132/BANG/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 6.12 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 131/BANG/2023[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2023AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…h and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, as a natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchases, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax.” 6.12 In the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT reported in (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as under (page 281): “7.2 . A similar question came up before this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and this Court while deciding the said issue has held as under: “Thus, it is apparent that both the Commissioner (Appeals)…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3), Mumbai vs. Suraj Exports, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1277/MUM/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1277/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Dcit-19(3) बिधम/ Suraj Exports Matru Mandir, Room De-8011/12/13 Bharat Vs. No.206, Grant Road, Diamond Bourse Bandra Mumbai-400007. Kurla Complex Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs3513J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, Delhi Dated 20.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Entire Addition Made By Ao (Purchases To The Tune Of Rs.3,79,50,581/-) & Restricting It To 8% N.P Of Such Purchases. 3. Brief Facts Are That The Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income On 11.10.2007 Declaring Total Income At Rs.53,24,567/-. Later, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened On The Basis Of Information Received From The Dgit(Inv.), Mumbai That During The Search & Survey Action Conducted In This Case Of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain & Family On 03.10.2013, The Investigation Wing Came To Know That Shri Bhanwarlal Jain Controlled Many Companies/Firm/ Proprietory

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. AR)

Section 143(3)

…eals) had estimated this difference at 3 per cent. of the bogus purchases and the Tribunal had accepted it. Whether an estimate should be at a particular sum or at a different sum can never be an issue of law. (Followed Sanjay Oilcake Industries v CIT ( 2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.)(HC) Referred N.K. Industries Ltd. v Dy CIT ( 2017) 292 CTR 354/ 8 ITR-OL 336 (Guj.)(HC), Vijay Proteins Ltd v. CIT (2015) 58 taxmann.com 44 (Guj.) (HC) (AY. 2011-12).” 7 A.Y. 2007-08 Suraj Exports 6. In the light of the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court according to us, the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) is a plausible view…

Shri Khandelwal Diamonds Private Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 245/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri C.P. Meena (Addl.CIT) a

Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…back to the AO. The case that is relied upon to support the contentions so raised are :-  N.K. Proteins Ltd. vs. DCIT (2017) 84 taxmann.com 195 (SC)  N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT (2016) taxmann.com 289 (Gujarat).  Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Gujarat) 7. In the rejoinder, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the year under consideration is the assessment year 2014-15 and there is no merit in the arguments of the ld. DR to send it back to 22 Shri Khandelwal Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. the file of the AO to decide it as afresh. Because there will not be any more requirement of findings o…

M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7289/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR

Section 148Section 151

…ly added as assessee's income. assessee's income. 13. The Hon'ble High Court Of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay 13. The Hon'ble High Court Of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay 13. The Hon'ble High Court Of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Versus CIT 316 ITR 274 (Gui) held that Oilcake Industries Versus CIT 316 ITR 274 (Gui) held that Oilcake Industries Versus CIT 316 ITR 274 (Gui) held that income used for inflated income used for inflated Purchase price and arising Purchase price and arising therefrom where the apparent sellers who had issued sale therefrom where the apparent sellers who had issued sal…

ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5718/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR

Section 148Section 151

…ly added as assessee's income. assessee's income. 13. The Hon'ble High Court Of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay 13. The Hon'ble High Court Of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay 13. The Hon'ble High Court Of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Versus CIT 316 ITR 274 (Gui) held that Oilcake Industries Versus CIT 316 ITR 274 (Gui) held that Oilcake Industries Versus CIT 316 ITR 274 (Gui) held that income used for inflated income used for inflated Purchase price and arising Purchase price and arising therefrom where the apparent sellers who had issued sale therefrom where the apparent sellers who had issued sal…

Sumer Chand Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-50(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 9702/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…o 4.13 of his order, the Ld. AO relying on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in M/s. Vijay Protein Limited vs. CIT 58 taxmann.com 44 (SLP filed by the Department dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court) and in Sanjay Oil Cake Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.) disallowed Rs. 85,52,431/- being 25% of alleged bogus purchase amount of Rs. 3,42,09,724/- on account of inflation of purchase price which he added to the income of the assessee and completed the assessment on total income of Rs. 92,09,440/- vide order dated 29.12.2017 under section 143(3)/147 of the Act. 7. The assessee challenged the in…

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7582/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

…oods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.). Such decision is also followed by this Court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of CIT vs. Kishor Amrudlal Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed". 6.24 The facts in the present case are similar to the facts in the above mentioned case. In the present case, the AO has shown that the part…

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7581/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

…oods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.). Such decision is also followed by this Court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of CIT vs. Kishor Amrudlal Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed". 6.24 The facts in the present case are similar to the facts in the above mentioned case. In the present case, the AO has shown that the part…

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7580/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

…oods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.). Such decision is also followed by this Court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of CIT vs. Kishor Amrudlal Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed". 6.24 The facts in the present case are similar to the facts in the above mentioned case. In the present case, the AO has shown that the part…

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7579/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

…oods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this Court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.). Such decision is also followed by this Court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of CIT vs. Kishor Amrudlal Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed". 6.24 The facts in the present case are similar to the facts in the above mentioned case. In the present case, the AO has shown that the part…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-25(3), Mumbai vs. Span Associates, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4258/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () Before Shri Om Prakash Kant () Before Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manish Ajudiya, DR

Section 40A(3)

…ase of Vijay proteins Ltd. Vs ACIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) and CIT v. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries v. Vs ACIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) and CIT v. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries v. Vs ACIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) and CIT v. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries v. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.)(HC) wherein it was held that not the entire ITR 274 (Guj.)(HC) wherein it was held that not the entire ITR 274 (Guj.)(HC) wherein it was held that not the entire amount, but the profit margin embedded in such amount w amount, but the profit margin embedded in such amount w amount, but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subj…

The DCIT, Central Circle-3, Baroda vs. M/S. Ultra Tech Transmission, Baroda

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for assessment year 2016-17

ITA 396/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member ITA Nos. 393, 394, 395, 396 & 1661 /Ahd/2019 Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2012-13 & 2016-17 The Deputy Commissioner M/s. Ultratech of Income Tax, Transmission Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-3, Vs GF-1, Radhakrishna Flat, 603, 6th Floor, Plot No. -7, Shanti Aayakar Bhavan, Niketan, SOC Race Course Circle, Nr. ESI Hospital, Vadodara-390007 Opp. Haveli Productivity (Appellant) Road, Alkapuri, Vadodara PAN: AABCU3751A (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.R. Reven…

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT

What is Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

M/S. Spr Spirits Private Limited (Formerly Known As Spr Group Holdings Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(3), Bangalore

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3), Mumbai vs. Suraj Exports, Mumbai

Shri Khandelwal Diamonds Private Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Jaipur

M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai

ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

Sumer Chand Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-50(4), New Delhi

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-25(3), Mumbai vs. Span Associates, Mumbai

The DCIT, Central Circle-3, Baroda vs. M/S. Ultra Tech Transmission, Baroda