Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 44 (0.46 seconds)

M/S. Banaskanth Dist. Co.-Op. Milk ... vs The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 20 March, 2018

Although the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Ajeet Seeds Ltd. (supra) refers to this fact in para 6 of its order, however, without following the above two decisions or without distinguishing the same or without any discussion as to how these two decisions are not applicable to the facts of the present case before it, the Tribunal simply dismissed the claim of deduction u/s 35(2AB). Therefore, the decision relied on by the Ld. DR cannot be followed the same being per incuriam.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 14 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Goetze (India) Ltd. vs Cit on 24 March, 2006

In view of the above discussion and following the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (supra) and the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Abhinitha Foundation Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in entertaining the claim made by the assessee otherwise than by filing a revised return.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1246 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders on 21 June, 2012

In view of the above discussion and following the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (supra) and the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Abhinitha Foundation Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in entertaining the claim made by the assessee otherwise than by filing a revised return.
1   2 3 4 5 Next