Silk v. Asstt Commissioner (ST-FAC)

157 Taxmann.com 65High Court#22819 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 352,032 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 136section 196section 19speaking ordersection 143(1)section 13prescribedsection 250companyindianfactotal income

Judgments citing Silk v. Asstt Commissioner (ST-FAC)

Shri Venkateshwara Panmasala Industries Pvt Ltd, Kolhapur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolhapur

The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 733/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2019-20 Shri Venkateshwara Panmasala Industries Pvt Ltd, 335, Sangli Kolhapur Byepass Road, Dharangutti Via Jaysingpur – 416 203. Pan: Aaccs5553P. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Asstt Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Kolhapur . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Hari Krishan [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 25/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/11/2024 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is Instituted U/S 253(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which Impugns First Appellate Order Dt. 06/03/2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/ Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Act Which Emerged In Relation To & Out Of Assessment Order Dt. 24/11/2023 Passed By Ld. Assessment Unit, Nfac [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] U/S 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act For Assessment Year 2019-20 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Hari Krishan [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2019-20 Shri Venkateshwara Panmasala Industries Pvt Ltd, 335, Sangli Kolhapur Byepass Road, Dharangutti Via Jaysingpur – 416 203. PAN: AACCS5553P. . . . . . . . Appellant V/s The Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Kolhapur . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by : Mr Hari Krishan [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 25/09/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26/11/2024 ORDER…

Ruhi Khalid Parwani, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(3) Pune, Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE

ITA 1553/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt. Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 1553/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ruhi Khalid Parwani 9, Meher House, Kahun Rd., Camp, Pune-411001 Pan : Aovpp5464Q . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Saurabh Patil [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SMT. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No. 1553/PUN/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ruhi Khalid Parwani 9, Meher House, Kahun Rd., Camp, Pune-411001 PAN : AOVPP5464Q . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. Income Tax Office, Ward-14(3), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Saurabh Patil [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /…

Shree Prabhu Petrochemicals Private Limited, Aurangabad vs. The Income Tax -1(5), Aurangabad

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE

ITA 511/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 511/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Shree Prabhu Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. 167, Cidco Colony, S.O., Shivaji Nagar-431003. Pan : Aarcs8700P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 24Section 250Section 270A

…ow cause notice is bad in law and deserves to be set-aside. The matter in result remanded back to the file of assessing officer for fresh consideration. 8. On a similar line the Hon’ble Madras High Court in ‘Chennai Silk VS Asstt Commissioner (ST-FAC) [2023, 157 Taxmann.com 65 (Mad)] occasioned to considered the validity of assessment where the Revenue failed to considered the reply or submission of the assessee. Their Hon’ble Lordship therein held that, failure on the part of the Assessing Officer to address the reply of the assessee by a speaking order, would vitiate the impugned proceedings. A similar ratio c…

Silk v. Asstt Commissioner (ST-FAC) (157 Taxmann.com 65) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax