Sood Brij & Associates v. CIT

203 Taxmann 188High Court2011#15262 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing Sood Brij & Associates v. CIT

M/S. Rp Associates, Greater Noida vs. DCIT, Noida

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1515/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita No.-1515/Del/2016(A.Y. 2012-13)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.-1515/Del/2016(A.Y. 2012-13) RP Associates vs DCIT H-11, Alpha-II, Circle-3 Distt. Gautam Budh Noida Nagar Greater Noida PAN : AANFR1249K Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. S.K.Chaturvedi, CA Revenue by Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR Date of Hearing 21.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement 23.10.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, J.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 04.02.2016 and 21.12.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal…

Jra & Associates, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5571/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms Suchitra Kamblejra & Associates Vs Acit B-15, Lower Ground Floor, Circle-37(1), Civic Centre Greater Kailash Enclave-Ii New Delhi New Delhi Aaafj4662K (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI P. M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER JRA & Associates Vs ACIT B-15, Lower Ground Floor, Circle-37(1), Civic Centre Greater Kailash Enclave-II New Delhi New Delhi AAAFJ4662K (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) Appellant by Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv, Ms. Deepika Agarwal, Adv Respondent by Sh. Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement 11.07.2018 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 22/07/2015 passed by CIT (A)-20, New Delhi…

M/S S.Hati, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir.23, Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 325/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri V.N. Purohit, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.M. Das, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (SMC), KOLKATA (Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, A.M.) ITA No.325/Kol/2017 : Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. S. Hati, C/o. V.N. Purohit Vs ACIT, Cir-23, Hooghly & Co. Chartered Accountants Aayakar Bhawan, G.T. Diamond Chambers, Unit-III, 4th Road, Khadina More, Floor, Suit No. 4G, 4, P.O. Chinsurah Chowringhee Lane, Hooghly - 712101 Kolkata - 700016 PAN: AAKFS8003R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Shri V.N. Purohit, CA Revenue by : Shri S.M. Das, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 10.07.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 14.07.2017 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is di…

Garg Trading Co., Rohtak vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6865/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Garg Trading Co. , C/O- N.C. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, New Garg, Chartered Accountant, M.G. Delhi Road, Rohtak Gir/Pan : Aaffg5606F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocates Respondent By Smt. Rishpal Bedi, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 18.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 13/11/2015 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Rohtak, For Assessment Year 2011-12, Raising Following Grounds: 1. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred Both In Law & On Facts In Sustaining Disallowance Of Rs. 169829/- Representing The Alleged Excess Salary Paid To The Partner By Invoking Clause (V) Of Section 40(B) Of The Act. 1.1 That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Has Failed To Appreciated That The Salary Paid To The Partners Was In Terms Of Clause (9) Of The Deed Of Partnership Dated 12.04.2007 Which Had Been Allowed Consistently In Preceding & Succeeding Assessment Years And, Therefore, Disallowance Made Is Illegal, Invalid & Untenable. It Is, Therefore, Prayed That Additions Sustained Of Rs. 169829/- Be Deleted & Appeal Of The Appellant May Kindly Be Allowed.

Section 143(3)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Garg Trading Co. , C/o- N.C. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, New Garg, Chartered Accountant, M.G. Delhi Road, Rohtak GIR/PAN : AAFFG5606F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by S/sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocates Respondent by Smt. Rishpal Bedi, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing 18.04.2016 Date of pronouncement 31.05.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal of the assessee is directed against order dated 13/11/2015 of learned Commissio…

M/S. Ranvir Singh & Co., Rohtak vs. ITO, Rohtak

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3778/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40Section 40BSection 40B(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-I’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.3777 & 3778/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 & 2010-11) Shri Ranvir Singh & Co., vs. ITO, Ward 3, C/o N.C. Garg CA, Rohtak. M.G. Road, Rohtak. (PAN : AABFR3757N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 18.02.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2016 O R D E R The assessee agreed that in both the appeals, the issue involved is common, therefore, both these appeals be decided on the basis of the facts invo…

M/S. Ranvir Singh & Co., Rohtak vs. ITO, Rohtak

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3777/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40Section 40BSection 40B(5)