Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.19 seconds)Section 138 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Antitrust - Section 26(6) Disclaimer: ... vs M/S Aci Worldwide Solutions Private ... on 13 January, 2015
(emphasis provided)
3.6 Addressing the impugned order, it was submitted that the CIT(A)
relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of
Punjab & Haryana in the case of J.R. Solvent Industries (P.) Ltd. V. CITIT
Ref. No. 105 of 1997 dt. 16/04/2012. The said decision, it was
submitted, was not applicable to the facts of the assessee's case. Inviting
attention to page 49 of the impugned order it was submitted that the
facts of the said decision have been discussed by the CIT(A) in the very
same order and a perusal of the same it was submitted would show that
the facts are entirely distinguishable. On a reading of the extract from
the impugned order itself it was submitted it would be evident that
detailed investigation on facts of the said decision demonstrated that the
evidences by way of sale bills filed by the said assessee did not inspire
any confidence. For ready reference para-9 of the said decision extracted
in the impugned order illustrates this fact. The said extract of the
aforesaid decision reproduced from the impugned order is extracted
hereunder:
1