Smt. Ramilaben B. Patel v. ITO

100 Taxmann.com 325Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2018#7127 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Smt. Ramilaben B. Patel v. ITO

M/S BAJRANG LAL JINDAL,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 373/LKW/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2008-09 M/S Bajrang Lal Jindal, 140, Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Anandpuri, Kanpur, U.P. Tax-I, Kanpur Pan: Aanpj5660J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. P.K. Kapoor, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.11.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)- Kanpur, Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 1,46,11,400/- Made To The Returned Income Of The Assessee As Unexplained Cash Credits By The Assessing Officer In His Order Dated 31.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “1. That The Ld. Cit (A) I, Kanpur Has Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs. 14611400.00 To The Returned Income Of The Assessee As Unexplained Cash Credits. 2. That The Reasons Recorded For Initiation Of Proceedings U/S 147 By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Were Based On Improper Premise & Accordingly No Legal & Factual Lengs To Stand & Acordingly All Subsequent Proceedings Are Bad In Law. 3. That The Observation Of The Ld. Cit (A) I, Kanpur Confirming View Of Ld. A O That M/S. Maa Devasar Commodity Is Inexistant Is Factually Incorrect. 4. That Ld. Cit (A) I, Kanpur Has Erred In Not Appreciating The Fact That When The Beneficiary Of The Funds Are Not The Assessee, There Could Be No Addition In His Hands.

For Appellant: Sh. P.K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW ‘B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y. 2008-09 M/s Bajrang Lal Jindal, 140, vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Anandpuri, Kanpur, U.P. Tax-I, Kanpur PAN: AANPJ5660J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. P.K. Kapoor, C.A. Revenue by: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR Date of hearing: 27.08.2025 Date of pronouncement: 20.11.2025 O R D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A)- Kanpur, confirming the addition of Rs. 1,46,11,400/- made t…

KALPANA MISHRA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD 5(4), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 491/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.491/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs Ito Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Alfpm 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri B.R.Pattnaik, Ca राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.03.2024, Passed By The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1062168195(1) For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds :- 1. Hon'Ble Cit(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Ao Even Though The Learned Ao Has Exceeded His Jurisdiction In A Limited Scrutiny Case Selected Under Cass Only To Examine Whether The Investment & Income Relating To Securities Transactions Are Duly Disclosed Or Not & Added A Sum Of Rs.44,00,000.00 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Obtaining Prior Administrative Approval Of The Concerned Pr. Cit/Cit As Prescribed In Circular F. No. 225/402/2018/Ita.Ii, Dated 28- 11-2018 & Instruction No.5/2016 [F.No.225/269/2015-

Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, कटक कटक "यायपीठ "यायपीठ,कटक आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण कटक कटक "यायपीठ "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/ITA No.491/CTK/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs ITO Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 PAN No. :ALFPM 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िन…

NERALAKERE MARULASIDDAPPA DAYANANDA ,TARIKERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , CHIKMAGALUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 261/BANG/2023[2017-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jun 2023AY 2017-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Neralakere Marulasiddappa The Income-Tax Officer, Dayananda, Ward-1, S/O Ns Marulasiddappa, Vs. Chikmagalur. Neralekere Post, Tarikere. Pan – Aswpd 5306 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vevek A.R, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.06.2023 O R D E R Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 2/2/2023 Passed By The Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18 On Following Ground Of Appeal:- 1. The Entire Appeal Order Passed By Learned Cit In So Far It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Principle Of Equity & Justice. 2. The Learned Ao Erred In Bringing Amount Of Rs.18.44 Lakhs To Tax Without Appreciating The Fact That, Appellant Is An Agriculturist & Has Given All Particulars Which Were Sought By The Learned Ao. 3. The Learned Ao Ought To Have Considered The Income Of Huf Also While Concluding The Assessment. Page 2 Of 7

For Appellant: Shri Vevek A.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni
Section 1Section 115BSection 250Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69CSection 69D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2017-18 Shri Neralakere Marulasiddappa The Income-tax Officer, Dayananda, Ward-1, S/o NS Marulasiddappa, Vs. Chikmagalur. Neralekere Post, Tarikere. PAN – ASWPD 5306 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Vevek A.R, Advocate Revenue by : Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 15.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 22.06.2023 O R D E R PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 2/2/2…

SHRI ASHISH AJIT SINGHAI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 387/SRT/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.387/Srt/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Ashish Ajitsinghai Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), Surat. Flat No. 3, Model Town 13, Om Nagar, Dumbhal, Surat-395010 [Pan: Ajwps 5085 N अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Manish J. Shah, A.R. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupama Singla – Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing: 14.10.2021 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 06.01.2022

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ,सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, Hon'ble JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, Hon'ble ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.387/SRT/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Ashish AjitSinghai Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), Surat. Flat No. 3, Model Town 13, Om Nagar, Dumbhal, Surat-395010 [PAN: AJWPS 5085 N अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Shri Manish J. Shah, A.R. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by Mrs. Anupama Singla – Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of hearing: 14.10.2021 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pron…

M/S. VIJAY H. LILAWALA,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(5),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2044/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2044/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Vijay H Lilawala, V. Income Tax Officer, 2/1174, Sakdisweri, Sangrampur, Ward-1(2)(5), Surat. Surat-395 002. [Pan: Aazpl 4924 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Shri Mehul Shah, Ca िनधा"रतीकीओरसे /Assessee By Ms. Anupama Singla, Sr. Dr राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 11-02-2020 उद्घोषणाकीतारीख/Pronouncement On: 12-02-2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per O.P.Meena, Am: 1. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Surat [In Short “The Cit(A)”] Dated 24-05-2016, For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Ground No.1 & 3 Are Reopening Of Assessment Is Not Pressed Before Us, Hence, The Same Is Treated As Dismissed As Not Pressed. Ground No.2 Relates To Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Making 3. Addition Of Rs.20,38,261/- On Account Of Deposit In The Bank Account From Undisclosed Sources. Brief Facts Of The Cases Are That The Ao Noticed That There Are Deposits 4. To The Tune Of Rs.20,38,261/- In His Bank Account For The Year Under Consideration. It Was Explained That The Cash Deposit In The Bank Account

Section 44A

…M/s. Vijay H Lilawala v. ITO, Ward-1(2)(5),Surat/ITA. 2044/AHD/2016/A.Y.2008-09 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2044/AHD/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Vijay H Lilawala, V. Income Tax Officer, 2/1174, Sakdisweri, Sangrampur, Ward-1(2)(5), Surat. Surat-395 002. [PAN: AAZPL 4924 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Shri Mehul Shah, CA िनधा"रतीकीओरसे /Assessee by Ms. Anupama Singla, Sr. DR राज"कीओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date of hearing: 11-02-2020 उद्घोषणाकीता…

SHRI DHAVAL RAMEHSCHANDRA SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 121/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad&Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 121/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dhaval Rameshchandra Ito बनाम/ Ward-5(1)(3), Shah Vs. 6Th Floor, Nature View 8-A Regency Park, Building, Nr. Hk House, Nr. Mithakhali Gam, Ashram Road, Mithakhali, Ahmedabad- 380009 Ahmedabad- 380006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anj Ps4 371 G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T. Sankar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: 08/07/2019
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘SMC’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER &SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 121/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dhaval Rameshchandra ITO बनाम/ Ward-5(1)(3), Shah Vs. 6th Floor, Nature View 8-A Regency Park, Building, Nr. HK House, Nr. Mithakhali Gam, Ashram Road, Mithakhali, Ahmedabad- 380009 Ahmedabad- 380006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ANJ PS4 371 G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Parin Shah, AR अपीलाथ" ओर से/Appellant by…

Smt. Ramilaben B. Patel v. ITO (100 Taxmann.com 325) — Cited in 16 Judgments | BharatTax