Sri Krishna Mehal v. Asstt. CIT

257 ITR 283High Court2002#20150 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,487 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 145(1)section 211section 10(1)section 42section 145(2)project completion methodsection 43cjdatrcpercentage completion methodsection 2(47)principal officer

Judgments citing Sri Krishna Mehal v. Asstt. CIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 5067/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: PendingITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…ia Power Corporation Ltd., Pune 83. The decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court (Single Member) in the case of Sri Krishna Mahal v. Asstt. CIT[2001] 250ITR 333 was affirmed by Division Bench in the judgment reported in Sri Krishna Mehal v. Asstt. CIT[2002] 257 ITR 283 (Mad.). 11. On going through the entire judgement of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal (supra) the present case is squarely covered in favour of Revenue. In the judgment the details for issuing notice have been discussed elaborately after discussing many judgments regarding the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act after satisfying the…

Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd, Pune vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 1155/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…ia Power Corporation Ltd., Pune 83. The decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court (Single Member) in the case of Sri Krishna Mahal v. Asstt. CIT[2001] 250ITR 333 was affirmed by Division Bench in the judgment reported in Sri Krishna Mehal v. Asstt. CIT[2002] 257 ITR 283 (Mad.). 11. On going through the entire judgement of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal (supra) the present case is squarely covered in favour of Revenue. In the judgment the details for issuing notice have been discussed elaborately after discussing many judgments regarding the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act after satisfying the…

Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 109/PUN/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…ia Power Corporation Ltd., Pune 83. The decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court (Single Member) in the case of Sri Krishna Mahal v. Asstt. CIT[2001] 250ITR 333 was affirmed by Division Bench in the judgment reported in Sri Krishna Mehal v. Asstt. CIT[2002] 257 ITR 283 (Mad.). 11. On going through the entire judgement of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal (supra) the present case is squarely covered in favour of Revenue. In the judgment the details for issuing notice have been discussed elaborately after discussing many judgments regarding the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act after satisfying the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri C Gangadhara Murthy, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2400/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…icer [1998] 229 ITR 46 (All.)." 34. The decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court (Single Member) in the case of Sri Krishna Mahal v. Asstt. CIT[2001] 250 ITR 333 was affirmed by Division Bench in the judgment reported in Sri Krishna Mehal v. Asstt. CIT[2002] 257 ITR 283 (Mad.). 35. The ITAT Delhi (Special Bench) in the case of Motorola lnc. (supra), also did not have the benefit of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (supra). Further, it was on a different proposition. It was held that if an assessee files return voluntarily within time period under sub- sectio…

Sri Krishna Mehal v. Asstt. CIT (257 ITR 283) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax