Synthetics v. Addl. CIT

48 STC 248Supreme Court of India1981#20958 most cited
4

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

Issues it is cited on

doctrine of mergersection 80hhcsection 32section 254section 37(1)section 154first appealsection 15prescribedcompanysection 250section 143(3)

Judgments citing Synthetics v. Addl. CIT

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 211/PAN/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…ter covered by the order appealed against, irrespective of the fact whether any matter/issue is raised in appeal or not. The decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in ‘J.K. Synthetics Vs Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 and ‘Tel Utpadak Kendra Vs Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248 was pressed and reiterated that, when an appeal is filed against the order of assessment, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. Therefore, since the original assessment order is replaced by the consequential order passed on 28/03/2013, the period of four years for rectific…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 210/PAN/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…ter covered by the order appealed against, irrespective of the fact whether any matter/issue is raised in appeal or not. The decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in ‘J.K. Synthetics Vs Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 and ‘Tel Utpadak Kendra Vs Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248 was pressed and reiterated that, when an appeal is filed against the order of assessment, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. Therefore, since the original assessment order is replaced by the consequential order passed on 28/03/2013, the period of four years for rectific…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 209/PAN/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…ter covered by the order appealed against, irrespective of the fact whether any matter/issue is raised in appeal or not. The decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in ‘J.K. Synthetics Vs Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 and ‘Tel Utpadak Kendra Vs Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248 was pressed and reiterated that, when an appeal is filed against the order of assessment, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. Therefore, since the original assessment order is replaced by the consequential order passed on 28/03/2013, the period of four years for rectific…

M/S Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Pr. CIT-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 274/JPR/2021[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur14 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.274/JPR/2021 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years :2014-15 M/s Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 3, Amrapali Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. cuke Vs. Pr.CIT-2, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 0763 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Manish Agarwal(C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 15/02/2

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…y provision, as in the Explanation below section 251 of the Income-tax Act mentioned above. J.K. Synthetics v. Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344, (Alld) upholds this view. The ratio of the decision in Tel Utpadak Kendra's case [Tel Utpadak Kendra v. Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248.] is also that when an appeal is filed, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. 20 M/S Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 231 ITR 50 CIT vs. Shri Arbuda Mills Ltd. (SC): Revision – Doctrine of merger – Powers of Commissioner – Amendment of section 263(1) by Finance Act, 1989, with r…

Synthetics v. Addl. CIT (48 STC 248) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax