Vishwanath Engineers v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

354 ITR 211High Court2013#17803 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Judgments citing Vishwanath Engineers v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S. SHRI RANG INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 665/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 68

…Gujarat) 6. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2012] 26 taxmann.com 51 (Guj.) 7. Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the case of Vishwanath Engineers vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 354 ITR 211 (Guj) 8. Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Income- tax vs. Amitabh Bachchan [2013] 33 taxmann.com 535 (Bombay) 9. High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-XI vs. Batra Bhatta Company [2008] 174 Taxman 444 (Delhi) 10. Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Corpo…

TANVI SANDEEP MATHUR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 20/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 151(2)Section 54

…t) 6) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Power Corporation Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 26 taxmann.com 51 (Guj) 7) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vishwanath Engineers vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 354 ITR 211 (Guj) 8) Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Amitabh Bachchan [2013] 33 taxmann.com 535 (Bombay) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Page 4 of 9 9) Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-XI vs. Batra Bhatta company [2008] 174 Taxman 444 (Delhi) 10) Hon’ble High Court of Madras in…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the ld AO on the limited issue that order passed by the ld AO is barred by limitation. Ground No. 1 is dismissed

ITA 6079/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(Ltu), Vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, Nbcc Plaza Pusp Vihar, Rk Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT(LTU), Vs. M/s. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, NBCC Plaza Pusp Vihar, RK Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR Assessee by: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Ms. Depashree Rao, Adv Mr. Vibhu Aggarwal, CA Date of Hearing 13/07/2020 Date of pronouncement 21/07/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal filed by the ld DCIT (LTU), Circle-1, New Delhi [ The ld AO]…

ANIS AHMED MIYA MOHAMMED KAPADIA,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1),, SURAT

In the result,the appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal ground

ITA 1397/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1397/Ahd/2016/Srt िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2008-09 Anis Ahmed Miya Mohammed Vs. Income Tax Officer, Kapadia, Ward-3(3)(1), 11/900, Sindhiwad,Chowk Bazar, Surat. Surat – 395 003. [Pan: Adtpk 8547N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R.N. Vepari, C.A ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Mrs. R.Kavitha, Sr. D.R सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-03-2018 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13-03-2018 आदेश/Order Perc.M.Garg: This Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Surat (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 14.03.2016 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09 Passed In The First Appeal No.Cas/3/Trfd/V/118/2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged Reopening Of Assessment U/S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) & Consequently Notice Issued U/S. 148 Of The Act By Adjudicating The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri R.N. Vepari, C.A ""For Respondent: Mrs. R.Kavitha, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…is contention. 3 ITA No.1397/AHD/2016/SRT (A.Y: 2008-09) ShriAnis Ahmed Miya Mohammed Kapadia 4. Replying to the above, the ld. AR placing reliance on the ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vishwanath Engineers v. ACIT [2013] 354 ITR 211 (Guj) submitted that the AO in para 7 of the reassessment order as reproduced the objections of the assessee which have been adjudicated therein. Therefore, there is no fault on the part of the AO and it cannot be allotted that the AO has not considered the objection of the AO while passing the impugned reassessment order. 5. On careful consider…

DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S. VOITH PAPER FABRICS INDIA LTD., FARIDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6719/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Voith Paper Fabrics India Ltd, Vs. Circle-Ii, Block-B, Plot No. 113-114A, New Cgo Complex, Sector-24, Faridabad Faridabad Pan: Aabcp0441Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Santosh Kr. Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shravan Gotru, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 17

…ferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A) who per order dated 8/10/2015 has held that the case of the appellant is squarely covered by judgment of Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in case of Citibank transport versus ACIT 362 ITR 72 and before the engineers versus 80 354 ITR 211 is the assessment is being reopen on the basis of the opinion which is not permissible in law. He further held that while issuing the notice under section 148 the reasons recorded does not show that the income has escaped due to failure on part of the appellant to disclose all material facts in original assessment proceedings. He further noted th…