Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.34 seconds)Acit, New Delhi vs M/S. Eicher Motors Ltd., New Delhi on 16 May, 2019
i) CIT vs. Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518 (P&H);
ii) ACIT vs. Eicher Ltd. 101 TTJ (Del) 369; and
iii) Maruti Udyog vs. DCIT 92 ITD 119 (Del)
M/S Godrej Investment Pvt. Ltd. (Now ... vs Dcit 14(1)(2), Mumbai on 26 November, 2021
However, it is seen that though Rule 8D is
not applicable, but the Assessing Officer is duty bound to make
the disallowance under Section 14A after considering all the
facts and circumstances of the case as observed by Hon'ble
Bombay High Court in the aforementioned case of Godrej &
Boyce Mfg. Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Therefore, keeping in view the
facts and circumstances of the case, we consider it just and
proper to restore this issue to the file of Assessing Officer to
consider this issue raised in the present appeal denovo as per
the provisions of law after giving the assessee a reasonable
opportunity of hearing. Therefore, we restore this issue to the
file of Assessing Officer to reconsider and re-adjudicate the
same after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of
7 ITA No.3843/Del/2011
C.O. No.330/Del/2011
hearing. We direct accordingly. In the result, the ground No.2
raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in the
manner aforesaid."
Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii Ludhiana vs M/S Hero Cycles Ltd. on 23 January, 2020
i) CIT vs. Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518 (P&H);
ii) ACIT vs. Eicher Ltd. 101 TTJ (Del) 369; and
iii) Maruti Udyog vs. DCIT 92 ITD 119 (Del)
1