Vide CIT v. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L

104 ITR 493Reported decision#13236 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Judgments citing Vide CIT v. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L

M.P.M.SATHYANARAYANAN HUF VERSUS,TRICHY vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), TRICHY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 157/CHNY/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2711-2713/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan, The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aawps 7574 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.154-157/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aaahm 4540 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Maruthappan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2022 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr.C.Maruthappan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…order. The true view is that while the Assessing Officer is not bound to accept as true any Possible explanations which the asssessee may put forth he cannot also arbitrarily reject the assessee's explanations. Vide CIT Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L td 1976 104 ITR 493 BomFor the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the additions on account of HUF s income treated as NOT EXPLAINED in the capacity of kartha may be deleted and justice rendered. 13. The assessee filed an affidavit with a request to condone the delay. We find that the delay was mainly due to ill-health of the Karta of (HUF…

M.P.M.SATHYANARAYANAN HUG VERSUS,TRICHY vs. ITO,WARD 1(1), TIRUCHIRAPALLI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 156/CHNY/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2711-2713/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan, The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aawps 7574 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.154-157/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aaahm 4540 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Maruthappan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2022 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr.C.Maruthappan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…order. The true view is that while the Assessing Officer is not bound to accept as true any Possible explanations which the asssessee may put forth he cannot also arbitrarily reject the assessee's explanations. Vide CIT Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L td 1976 104 ITR 493 BomFor the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the additions on account of HUF s income treated as NOT EXPLAINED in the capacity of kartha may be deleted and justice rendered. 13. The assessee filed an affidavit with a request to condone the delay. We find that the delay was mainly due to ill-health of the Karta of (HUF…

M.P.M.SATHYANARAYAN HUF VERSUS,TRICHY vs. ITO,WARD 1(1), TIRUCHIRAPALLI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 155/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2711-2713/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan, The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aawps 7574 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.154-157/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aaahm 4540 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Maruthappan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2022 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr.C.Maruthappan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…order. The true view is that while the Assessing Officer is not bound to accept as true any Possible explanations which the asssessee may put forth he cannot also arbitrarily reject the assessee's explanations. Vide CIT Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L td 1976 104 ITR 493 BomFor the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the additions on account of HUF s income treated as NOT EXPLAINED in the capacity of kartha may be deleted and justice rendered. 13. The assessee filed an affidavit with a request to condone the delay. We find that the delay was mainly due to ill-health of the Karta of (HUF…

MPM SATHYANARAYANAN HUF ,TRICHY vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), TRICHY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 154/CHNY/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2711-2713/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan, The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aawps 7574 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.154-157/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aaahm 4540 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Maruthappan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2022 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr.C.Maruthappan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…order. The true view is that while the Assessing Officer is not bound to accept as true any Possible explanations which the asssessee may put forth he cannot also arbitrarily reject the assessee's explanations. Vide CIT Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L td 1976 104 ITR 493 BomFor the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the additions on account of HUF s income treated as NOT EXPLAINED in the capacity of kartha may be deleted and justice rendered. 13. The assessee filed an affidavit with a request to condone the delay. We find that the delay was mainly due to ill-health of the Karta of (HUF…

SHRI M.P.M. SATHYANARAYANAN,,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD -1 (1),, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2713/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2711-2713/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan, The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aawps 7574 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.154-157/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aaahm 4540 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Maruthappan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2022 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr.C.Maruthappan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…order. The true view is that while the Assessing Officer is not bound to accept as true any Possible explanations which the asssessee may put forth he cannot also arbitrarily reject the assessee's explanations. Vide CIT Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L td 1976 104 ITR 493 BomFor the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the additions on account of HUF s income treated as NOT EXPLAINED in the capacity of kartha may be deleted and justice rendered. 13. The assessee filed an affidavit with a request to condone the delay. We find that the delay was mainly due to ill-health of the Karta of (HUF…

SHRI M.P.M. SATHYANARAYANAN,,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD -1 (1),, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2712/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2711-2713/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan, The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aawps 7574 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.154-157/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aaahm 4540 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Maruthappan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2022 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr.C.Maruthappan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…order. The true view is that while the Assessing Officer is not bound to accept as true any Possible explanations which the asssessee may put forth he cannot also arbitrarily reject the assessee's explanations. Vide CIT Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L td 1976 104 ITR 493 BomFor the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the additions on account of HUF s income treated as NOT EXPLAINED in the capacity of kartha may be deleted and justice rendered. 13. The assessee filed an affidavit with a request to condone the delay. We find that the delay was mainly due to ill-health of the Karta of (HUF…

SHRI M.P. SATHYANARAYANAN,,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD -1 (1),, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2711/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2711-2713/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan, The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aawps 7574 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.154-157/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 V. Mr.M.P.M.Sathyanarayanan (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 108, Big Bazaar Street, Ward-1(1), Trichy. Thuraiyur, Trichy District. [Pan:Aaahm 4540 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Maruthappan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2022 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Mr.C.Maruthappan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…order. The true view is that while the Assessing Officer is not bound to accept as true any Possible explanations which the asssessee may put forth he cannot also arbitrarily reject the assessee's explanations. Vide CIT Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L td 1976 104 ITR 493 BomFor the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the additions on account of HUF s income treated as NOT EXPLAINED in the capacity of kartha may be deleted and justice rendered. 13. The assessee filed an affidavit with a request to condone the delay. We find that the delay was mainly due to ill-health of the Karta of (HUF…

Vide CIT v. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills L (104 ITR 493) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax