Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.38 seconds)
Xchanging Solutions Ltd, Bengaluru vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 21 December, 2020 cites

M/S. Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., ... vs Acit, New Delhi on 23 August, 2018

10. Respectfully following the aforesaid view of the Tribunal, we quash the impugned order of assessment. Since the impugned order of assessment is quashed on the ground that the same is not in conformity with the provisions of section 144C of the Act and further on the ground that the time for passing the final order of assessment is barred by time, we are of the view that the other issues raised by the assessee in its grounds of appeal and the grounds raised by the revenue in its appeal does not require any consideration. As far as the decision cited by the learned DR in the case of H & M Hennes & Mauritz India (P) Ltd. (supra) is concerned, we find that in the said decision, the counsel for the Assessee has in para 3.8 of the said order prayed for setting aside the final order of assessment of AO to pass orders in accordance with the directions of the DRP. Thus, it is a case of concession by the Assessee and not on the basis of arguments advanced by the parties. The law is well settled that a decision on concession of the counsel cannot be regarded as a precedent. Therefore, the decision cited by the learned DR does not support the case of the revenue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 10 - Cited by 3 - Full Document
1