Waman Padmanabh Dande v. CIT

22 ITR 339Reported decision1952#20002 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2017.

Judgments citing Waman Padmanabh Dande v. CIT

SHRI MANAV KEJRIWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-49(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1342/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263

…ab Chandra Mandal (1950) 18 ITR 569 (SC) : TC 9R. 617, the Hon'ble Apex Court had laid down that return not signed or thumb marked by the illiterate assessee could not be treated as a properly signed and a valid return. In Waman Padmanabh Dande vs. CIT (1952) 22 ITR 339 (Nag) .' TC 9R 394, a Division Bench of the Nagpur High Court had held that "where a return made is not in the prescribed form, or is not signed and verified as required by the prescribed form, it is an invalid return". The identical view seems to have been expressed by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs. Dr. M.K. Gupta 1978 CTR (All) 36,…

SRI MANAB KEJRIWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-49(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 698/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jul 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.698/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Sri Manab Kejriwal, Block-9, Flat Vs. Income Tax Officer, No.5H, 5Th Floor, Space Town Ward-49(2), Kolkata Housing Complex, V.I.P. Road, Kolkata-170052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Awjpk 1519 R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.M.Surana राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S. Srivastava सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 06/06/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed (A.M.): The Assessee Has Preferred This Appeal Against The Order Vide Memo No. Cit-Xvii/U/S263/2012-13/1154-1157 Dated 26-2-2014, Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Xvii, (Cit For Short) Kolkata, Relating To Assessment Year 2009-2010, On The Following Grounds :- 1. For That The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A) Is Arbitrary, Illegal & Bad In Law. 2. For That The Ld. C.I.T Erred In Passing The Order U/ S. 263 When The Assessee Did Not File Any Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration, The Issue Was Not Examined By The Ao , The Assessment Was Completed Which Itself Was Bad In Law & Therefore The Entire Proceedings U/S. 263 Are Also Void-Ab Initio. 3. For That The Ld. C.I.T Erred In Exercising Jurisdiction U/S. 263 When All The Issues Raised In The Show Cause Notice Had Been Considered & Categorically Spelt Out By The Ao In His Order Passed U/S. 144, Duly Examined By Him Since The Assessment Itself Was Taken Up For Scrutiny Only On The Basis Of The Air Information In Respect Of The Impugned Amounts. 4. For That The Ld. Cit Himself Should Have Decided The Issue, Call For The Records & Examined The Same When The Specific Issue Was Taken Up Before The Ld. Cit That The Appellant Did Not File Any Return.

For Appellant: Shri S.M.SuranaFor Respondent: Shri S. Srivastava
Section 139(1)Section 140Section 144Section 263

…hab Chandra Mandal (1950) 18 ITR 569 (SC) : TC 9R.617, the Hon’ble Apex Court had laid down that return not signed or thumb marked by the illiterate assessee could not be treated as a properly signed and a valid return. In Waman Padmanabh Dande vs. CIT (1952) 22 ITR 339 (Nag) : TC 9R.394, a Division Bench of the Nagpur High Court had held that "where a return made is not in the prescribed form, or is not signed and verified as required by the prescribed form, it is an invalid return”. The identical view seems to have been expressed by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs. Dr. M.K. Gupta 1978 CTR (All) 36 :…

ACIT 8(3) (OSD), MUMBAI vs. CONFIDENCE PETROLEUM INIDA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee may be treated as partly allowed

ITA 4276/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 Acit 8(3)(Osd) Confidence Petroleum India R.No.210 Ltd, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Gate No.2, D.R. Container, S Vs. M.K. Rd. Jijamata, Nagar, Mahul Chembur, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400074 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No.Aaacd3658C Assessment Year: 2006-07 Confidence Petroleum India Acit 8(3)(Osd) Ltd, बनाम/ R.No.210 Gate No.2, D.R. Container, S Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Jijamata, Nagar, Mahul M.K. Rd. Chembur, Mumbai-400074 Mumbai-400020 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aajcs 6315G

Section 143(3)Section 144

…ma Fancy Stores v. CIT [1976] 104 ITR 190 (Mad.), CIT v. J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar [1977] 110 ITR 602 (Mad.), Addl. CIT v. Radhey Shyam [1980] 123 ITR 125 (All.). To file a revised return, no prior permission is required - Waman Padmanabh Dande v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 339 (Nag.). According to the plain language of section 139(5), it would apply when return of income is filed pursuant to section 139(1) or under section 142(1). 2.3.7 Therefore, the position of law is very clear, the moment a revised return is filed, it replaces the original return and, so to say, acquires the nature and character of the originally f…

CONFIDENCE PETROLEUM INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O. 8(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee may be treated as partly allowed

ITA 1608/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 Acit 8(3)(Osd) Confidence Petroleum India R.No.210 Ltd, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Gate No.2, D.R. Container, S Vs. M.K. Rd. Jijamata, Nagar, Mahul Chembur, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400074 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No.Aaacd3658C Assessment Year: 2006-07 Confidence Petroleum India Acit 8(3)(Osd) Ltd, बनाम/ R.No.210 Gate No.2, D.R. Container, S Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Jijamata, Nagar, Mahul M.K. Rd. Chembur, Mumbai-400074 Mumbai-400020 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aajcs 6315G

Section 143(3)Section 144

…ma Fancy Stores v. CIT [1976] 104 ITR 190 (Mad.), CIT v. J.K.A. Subramania Chettiar [1977] 110 ITR 602 (Mad.), Addl. CIT v. Radhey Shyam [1980] 123 ITR 125 (All.). To file a revised return, no prior permission is required - Waman Padmanabh Dande v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 339 (Nag.). According to the plain language of section 139(5), it would apply when return of income is filed pursuant to section 139(1) or under section 142(1). 2.3.7 Therefore, the position of law is very clear, the moment a revised return is filed, it replaces the original return and, so to say, acquires the nature and character of the originally f…

Waman Padmanabh Dande v. CIT (22 ITR 339) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax