Saurashtra Packaging (P) Ltd. v. CIT

204 ITR 443High Court1993#11260 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Saurashtra Packaging (P) Ltd. v. CIT

Smt. Sanya Surendra Mehta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1523/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 1523/JP/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2013-14 Smt. Sanya Surendra Mehta 301, Swadeshi Apartment, D-37-38 Shanti Path, Patrakar Colony, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur बनाम The ITO Ward - 6(1) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ABMPM 0118 L अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri P.C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Cho

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 148Section 249

…Para 10 of the order held as under:- “It is true that remand of a matter is discretionary. But such discretion is required to be shown to be exercised in a judicial manner. In the case of Saurashtra Packaging (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1996) 131 CTR (Guj) 40 : (1993) 204 ITR 443 (Guj), their Lordships of Gujarat High Court have observed that where matter can be disposed of by the Tribunal on the basis of material already on record, a remand should not be resorted to. It is always necessary to avoid multiplicity of proceeding and to save time. There are large number of decisions of High Courts and Supreme Court where inst…

Saurashtra Packaging (P) Ltd. v. CIT (204 ITR 443) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax