Surya Hatchery v. PCIT

222 DTR 57Reported decision2023#17253 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 69Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

malabar industrialsection 10(38)erroneous and prejudicialsection 115bbsection 115bliable to taxsection 133asection 115bbesection 263section 26income from other sourcessection 115

Judgments citing Surya Hatchery v. PCIT

Sh. Kirodi Mal Singhal, Alwar vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 664/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No.664/JP/2024 on the following grounds; "1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, order passed by the Ld. PCIT u/s 263 is illegal & bad in law and the same be quashed. 2. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in holding that the

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…by holding that the assessment order was passed without considering that such additional income fell under the purview of ss. 68 and 69 and that tax was chargeable u/s 115BBE as against normal rates. Sh. Kamlesh Singhal vs. PCIT Surya Hatchery Vs. PCIT (2023) 222 DTR 57 (Chd.) (Trib.) AO having accepted the additional income surrendered by the assessee at the time of survey u/s 133A as normal business income after making enquiries into the nature of assessee's income and considering the assessee's replies and the relevant facts on record, it cannot be held that the assessment order has been passed without a prope…

Sh. Kamlesh Singhal, Alwar vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 663/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No.664/JP/2024 on the following grounds; "1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, order passed by the Ld. PCIT u/s 263 is illegal & bad in law and the same be quashed. 2. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in holding that the

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…by holding that the assessment order was passed without considering that such additional income fell under the purview of ss. 68 and 69 and that tax was chargeable u/s 115BBE as against normal rates. Sh. Kamlesh Singhal vs. PCIT Surya Hatchery Vs. PCIT (2023) 222 DTR 57 (Chd.) (Trib.) AO having accepted the additional income surrendered by the assessee at the time of survey u/s 133A as normal business income after making enquiries into the nature of assessee's income and considering the assessee's replies and the relevant facts on record, it cannot be held that the assessment order has been passed without a prope…

Sarita Gupta, Alwar vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 662/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

…the provisions of sec. 263 by holding that the assessment order was passed without considering that such additional income fell under the purview of ss. 68 and 69 and that tax was chargeable u/s 115BBE as against normal rates. Surya Hatchery Vs. PCIT (2023) 222 DTR 57 (Chd.) (Trib.) AO having accepted the additional income surrendered by the assessee at the time of survey u/s 133A as normal business income after making enquiries into the nature of assessee's income and considering the assessee's replies and the relevant facts on record, it cannot be held that the assessment order has been passed without a prope…

Sh. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Alwar vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 661/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No.644/JP/2024 on the following grounds; "1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, order passed by the Ld. PCIT u/s 263 is illegal & bad in law and the same be quashed. 2. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in holding that the

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 127Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…the provisions of sec. 263 by holding that the assessment order was passed without considering that such additional income fell under the purview of ss. 68 and 69 and that tax was chargeable u/s 115BBE as against normal rates. Surya Hatchery Vs. PCIT (2023) 222 DTR 57 (Chd.) (Trib.) AO having accepted the additional income surrendered by the assessee at the time of survey u/s 133A as normal business income after making enquiries into the nature of assessee's income and considering the assessee's replies and the relevant facts on record, it cannot be held that the assessment order has been passed without a prope…

Sh. Rajeev Jain, Alwar vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 644/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 127Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…the provisions of sec. 263 by holding that the assessment order was passed without considering that such additional income fell under the purview of ss. 68 and 69 and that tax was chargeable u/s 115BBE as against normal rates. Surya Hatchery Vs. PCIT (2023) 222 DTR 57 (Chd.) (Trib.) AO having accepted the additional income surrendered by the assessee at the time of survey u/s 133A as normal business income after making enquiries into the nature of assessee's income and considering the assessee's replies and the relevant facts on record, it cannot be held that the assessment order has been passed without a prope…