Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 481 (0.92 seconds)
Documents citing Ntpc Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax-V on 16 April, 2014

Asst. Cit 9 (3)(2), Mumbai vs M/S Future Enterprises Ltd., Mumbai on 17 March, 2022

In this regard, we consider that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT (229) ITR 0383 (SC) held that legal issue which does not involve disputed fact can be entertained at the appellate stage. Following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court as supra, we consider that ld. CIT(A) has not made any error in allowing the claim of deduction of the assessee, therefore, we don't find any force in the appeal of the revenue the same stand dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Kaizen Organics Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 19 December, 2018

4. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record as it is apparent from the additional ground that the assessee has raised the issue of validity of re-assessment passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the IT Act without issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act. Thus the issue raised in the additional ground is purely legal in nature and all the relevant facts for adjudication of this issue are already on record, as no new fact is either required to be investigated or to be verified for the purpose of adjudication of this issue raised by the assessee, then there is no reason as to why the additional ground raised by the assessee should not be admitted for adjudication on merits. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and by following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC vs. CIT (supra), we admit the additional ground raised by the assessee for adjudication.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chandru K Mirchandani, Mumbai vs Ito 14(3)(3), Mumbai on 5 April, 2017

After due consideration of the assessee's submissions and the facts of the case, we are of the view that the additional grounds raised are to be admitted being legal grounds that would go to the very root of the matter and accordingly admit the same for consideration and adjudication in this appeal following the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. vs. CIT (supra).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 15 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Nilesh Kantilal Solanki, Mumbai vs Dcit 22(1), Navi Mumbai on 30 April, 2019

In view of the ratio laid down by the High Courts and the co-ordinate benches of the Tribunal, we are inclined to hold that there is no service of notice issued under section 143(2) of the 8 ITA No.4261/M/2011 Mr. Nilesh Kantilal Solanki Act on the assessee within the time limit as stipulated by the proviso to that section and therefore the assessment order so framed as null and void.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Mumbai International Airport P. Ltd, ... vs Addl Cit 8(2), Mumbai on 13 November, 2017

35. We have carefully considered the orders of authorities below and submissions of ld. Representatives of the parties. There is no dispute to the facts that runway, taxiway are necessary part of Airport operation and are specific part of infrastructure for use of aircrafts. These are not merely concrete structures. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT V/s Mazagaon Dock Ltd (1991) 191 ITR 460(Bom) has held that dry dock and wet dock created for ships are to be treated as plant and not building. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in the case of Karnataka Power Corpn. (supra) that power generating station building is not a simply concrete structure but a specially designed building and is to be treated as part of plant.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 58 - Cited by 8 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next