Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.28 seconds)

The J.C.I.T., Special Range-1 vs Kwality Cafe And Restaurant (P) Ltd. on 7 April, 2006

It was further contended that the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. H. Miller's Co. Ltd. 246 ITR 316 relied upon by the Departmental Representative is distinguishable on facts. It was further contended that Section 41 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not applicable in this case. Referring to the contention advanced on behalf of the Revenue that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has admitted additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A, it was contended that a ledger account of BBLIL had been filed before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and nothing turns upon the same for deciding the issue. It was accordingly pleaded that the appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... vs Kwality Cafe And Restaurant (P.) Ltd. on 7 April, 2006

It was further contended that the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. H. Miller & Co. Ltd. relied upon by the Departmental Representative is distinguishable on facts. It was further contended that Section 41 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not applicable in this case. Referring to the contention advanced on behalf of the revenue that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has admitted additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A, it was contended that a ledger account of BBLIL had been filed before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and nothing turns upon the same for deciding the issue. It was accordingly pleaded that the appeal of the revenue may be dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1