Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT

24 ITR 256Reported decision#20122 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT

ASHOK APPARELS P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T. CEN. CIR.47, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds No

ITA 7303/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Respondent: Shri B Pruseth &
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hould be applied, whether on the date of conversion or the date of purchase as stock in trade. Both the above issues have been deliberated by various courts over the years. The guiding principle has been laid out by the cases of Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 256) (SC) & CIT v. Dhanuka & Sons (124 ITR 24) (Cal), where it has been stated that even if the stock in trade to be valued at cost at for the purpose of calculation of cost of acquisition of capital asset. Relying on the Another leading case on the point is Keshavaji Karsondas Vs. CIT (207 ITR 737) where it was categorically held that what is relevan…

ASHOK APPARELS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds No

ITA 3563/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Respondent: Shri B Pruseth &
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hould be applied, whether on the date of conversion or the date of purchase as stock in trade. Both the above issues have been deliberated by various courts over the years. The guiding principle has been laid out by the cases of Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 256) (SC) & CIT v. Dhanuka & Sons (124 ITR 24) (Cal), where it has been stated that even if the stock in trade to be valued at cost at for the purpose of calculation of cost of acquisition of capital asset. Relying on the Another leading case on the point is Keshavaji Karsondas Vs. CIT (207 ITR 737) where it was categorically held that what is relevan…

ASHOK APPARELS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds No

ITA 3562/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Respondent: Shri B Pruseth &
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hould be applied, whether on the date of conversion or the date of purchase as stock in trade. Both the above issues have been deliberated by various courts over the years. The guiding principle has been laid out by the cases of Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 256) (SC) & CIT v. Dhanuka & Sons (124 ITR 24) (Cal), where it has been stated that even if the stock in trade to be valued at cost at for the purpose of calculation of cost of acquisition of capital asset. Relying on the Another leading case on the point is Keshavaji Karsondas Vs. CIT (207 ITR 737) where it was categorically held that what is relevan…

ASHOK APPARELS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds No

ITA 3561/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Respondent: Shri B Pruseth &
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hould be applied, whether on the date of conversion or the date of purchase as stock in trade. Both the above issues have been deliberated by various courts over the years. The guiding principle has been laid out by the cases of Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 256) (SC) & CIT v. Dhanuka & Sons (124 ITR 24) (Cal), where it has been stated that even if the stock in trade to be valued at cost at for the purpose of calculation of cost of acquisition of capital asset. Relying on the Another leading case on the point is Keshavaji Karsondas Vs. CIT (207 ITR 737) where it was categorically held that what is relevan…

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 256) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax