Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 57 (0.95 seconds)
Documents citing Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, New ... vs Maruti Suzuki India Limited (Successor ... on 4 September, 2017

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Sony Mobile Communications on 18 May, 2021

It was contended that the facts of the present case are different and thus the ratio of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (supra) is not applicable. It was further contended that in the present case, till the issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, the name of the assessee had not changed and the notice was issued in the correct name and the error, even if any in the name of the Respondent-Assessee in the assessment order, is an error which is within the jurisdiction of the AO and which is correctable.
Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - S Narula - Full Document

Genpact India Private Limited vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr. on 19 August, 2019

26. On the additional point raised by Mr. Ganesh on whether the impugned assessment order was framed against an entity which ceased to exist at the time of passing of the impugned order, on the strength of the decision of the Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v Maruti Suzuki India Limited (supra), this Court leaves it open to the Assessee to raise this issue in the appeal before the CIT (A). Likewise, although the impugned assessment order does not refer to the alternative plea of the Revenue seeking to justify the impugned demand with reference to Section 2 (22) (d) of the Act, the Court leaves it open to the Revenue raise this issue before the CIT (A).
Delhi High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 45 - S Muralidhar - Full Document

Sonansh Creations Pvt Ltd vs Assisstant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 10 January, 2025

In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki (India) Ltd.3, the Supreme Court rejected the Revenue's appeal against an order passed by this court upholding the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal holding that an assessment made in the name of Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. (SPIL) for AY 2012-13 was a nullity as the said entity had merged with Maruti Suzuki (India) Ltd. (MSIL) in terms of an approved scheme of amalgamation. In that case, SPIL had filed its return of income on 28.11.2012, however, thereafter, SPIL was merged with MSIL with effect from 01.04.2012 in terms of a scheme of amalgamation approved by the High Court. This fact was also informed to the AO. Notwithstanding the same, the AO had issued notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act addressed to SPIL - the amalgamating company which had ceased to exist. A reference was also made to Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO), which had culminated in an order passed under Section 92CA(3) of the Act. Thereafter, draft assessment order under Section 144C of the Act was framed in the name of SPIL. MSIL (the amalgamated company) filed its objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) as a successor-in-interest of SPIL.
Delhi High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - V Bakhru - Full Document

The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -9 vs Transcend Mt Services Pvt. Ltd. on 30 July, 2019

By the said judgment, which is an elaborate one, the Supreme Court upheld the decision dated 9th January, 2018 of this Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited which was for the AY 2012-2013, and which in turn followed the earlier decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -6 New Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (supra) which was for AY 2011-12.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - S Muralidhar - Full Document

Cyient Limited (Formerly Infotech ... vs Dcit, Circle-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad on 29 December, 2017

(ii) CIT vs. Micra India (P) Ltd reported in (2015) 57 Taxmann.com 163(Delhi) and (iii) Pr. CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd reported in (2017) 397 ITR 681 (Del.). He further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 2.11.2017 wherein the civil appeals of the Revenue against the above orders of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court have been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Thus, according to the learned Counsel for the assessee, following the above decisions, the assessment order has to be held to be void ab initio.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 26 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Dcit, New Delhi vs M/S. Shantikunj Investment Pvt. Ltd., ... on 2 January, 2018

10. It is also relevant to point that the order of the ITAT in the case of Maruti Suzuki Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 16(1), New Delhi (Supra) has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court vide order dated 4th September, 2017 in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki Private Ltd., reported at (2017) 85.com 330 wherein it has been held as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Transcend Mt Services Pvt. Ltd., New ... vs Dcit, Circle- 16(1), New Delhi on 30 November, 2017

10. It is also relevant to point that the order of the ITAT in the case of Maruti Suzuki Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 16(1), New Delhi (Supra) has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court vide order dated 4th September, 2017 in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki Private Ltd., (2017) 85.com 330 wherein it has been held as under:-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 14 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Genpact Infrastructure (Bhopal) Pvt. ... vs Dcit, New Delhi on 9 February, 2018

11. It is also relevant to point that the aforesaid order of the ITAT in the case of Maruti Suzuki Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 16(1), New Delhi (Supra) has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court vide order dated 4th Septe mber, 2017 in the case of Principa l Commissioner of Inco me Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki Private Ltd., reported at (2017) 85 Taxmann.com 330 (supra) wherein it has been held as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 24 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Akzo Nobel India Ltd., Gurgaon vs Dcit, New Delhi on 10 July, 2018

11. It is also relevant to point that the aforesaid order of the ITAT in the case of Maruti Suzuki Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 16(1), New Delhi (Supra) has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court vide order dated 4th September, 2017 in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ne w Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki Private Ltd., reported at (2017) 85 Taxmann.com 330 (supra) wherein it has been held as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 35 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next