Smt. Raj Rani Gulati v. CIT

249 CTR 51High Court2012#23953 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Judgments citing Smt. Raj Rani Gulati v. CIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Globus Spirits Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1522/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Parveen Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Shah Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

…India provides that no tax shall be levied or collected except by the authority of law. Acquiescence cannot take away from a party, the relief that he is entitled to. 20. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Smt. Raj Rani Gulati vs. CIT (2012) as reported in 249 CTR 51 (All.) observed in similar facts with reference to GOETZE (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) that the assessee was entitled to raise legal issue before First Appellate Authority which possessed co- terminus powers similar to the Assessing Officer. In that case, the assessee filed the return of income and inter alia declared Long Term Cap…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Globus Spirits Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2275/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Parveen Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Shah Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

…India provides that no tax shall be levied or collected except by the authority of law. Acquiescence cannot take away from a party, the relief that he is entitled to. 20. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Smt. Raj Rani Gulati vs. CIT (2012) as reported in 249 CTR 51 (All.) observed in similar facts with reference to GOETZE (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) that the assessee was entitled to raise legal issue before First Appellate Authority which possessed co- terminus powers similar to the Assessing Officer. In that case, the assessee filed the return of income and inter alia declared Long Term Cap…

Goverdhan Sigh Shekhawat, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 517/JPR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varindar Mehta (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 244ASection 54F

…of the Act. In this circular, the CBDT has emphasized that the Department should not take advantage of the assessee’s ignorance. Even the ld. CIT(A) was silent on this aspect. In support, reliance was placed on the cases of Smt. Rajrani Gulati v/s. CIT (2012) 249 CTR 51 (All.), ACIT v. Technofab Engg. Ltd. (2009) TIOL 664 ITAT (Del.). 11. It was submitted that above facts thus, clearly show that a substantive compliance of the law was made by the appellant. The legislature, with a view to encourage the housing sector intended that sale consideration should not remain with the appellant but should be used within…

Smt. Raj Rani Gulati v. CIT (249 CTR 51) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax