Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (0.35 seconds)
The Dy. Cit., Circle-4(1)(2),, ... vs M/S. Vishal Fabrics Ltd.,, Ahmedabad on 7 January, 2022 cites

Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited,, ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 August, 2018

Considering the entire aspect of the matter we find that the judgment particularly passed in the matter of Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd. vs. DCIT, Vadodara passed by the Coordinate Bench on the similar issue, the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT-Vadodara-1 ITA No.1820/Ahd/2019 DCIT vs. Vishal Fabrics Ltd.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 72 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Ppg Coatings India P.Ltd (Now Merged ... vs Dcit - 9(2), Mumbai on 3 January, 2022

30. We have duly considered rival submissions and gone through the record carefully before us the dispute has two dimensions. In the first fold of dispute the issue is whether the claim of the assessee for enhanced deduction can be entertained during the assessment proceedings by way of a letter. The Id.DRP after putting reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geotze India Ltd (supra) did not accept the claim of the assesses in the assessment year 2012-13. it has boon hi ought to our notice that such claim can be made even before the Id.DRP in the form of objection, A reference to the decisions of ITAT, Mumbai and Bangalore Benches have been made: Asian Paints Vs. DOIT, Mumbai 88 taxmann.com 677, and Himalaya Drug Co. Vs. DCIT, Bangalore, 48 taxmann.com 65 (2017). The ld. counsel for the assessee also put reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of Mitesh Impex, 270 CTR 66. This decision propounds that when the taxability of the assessee is going to be effected, then it can raise a fresh plea before the appellate authorities. Taking a leaf from this reasoning, ITAT, Mumbai and Bangalore have propounded that fresh claim can be made even before the DRP. Thus, respectfully following these decisions, we uphold that in the assessment year 2012-13, the DRP ought to have entertained the claim of the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 3 - Cited by 33 - Full Document

M/S The Himalaya Drug Company, ... vs Dcit, Bangalore on 30 April, 2019

30. We have duly considered rival submissions and gone through the record carefully before us the dispute has two dimensions. In the first fold of dispute the issue is whether the claim of the assessee for enhanced deduction can be entertained during the assessment proceedings by way of a letter. The Id.DRP after putting reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geotze India Ltd (supra) did not accept the claim of the assesses in the assessment year 2012-13. it has boon hi ought to our notice that such claim can be made even before the Id.DRP in the form of objection, A reference to the decisions of ITAT, Mumbai and Bangalore Benches have been made: Asian Paints Vs. DOIT, Mumbai 88 taxmann.com 677, and Himalaya Drug Co. Vs. DCIT, Bangalore, 48 taxmann.com 65 (2017). The ld. counsel for the assessee also put reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of Mitesh Impex, 270 CTR 66. This decision propounds that when the taxability of the assessee is going to be effected, then it can raise a fresh plea before the appellate authorities. Taking a leaf from this reasoning, ITAT, Mumbai and Bangalore have propounded that fresh claim can be made even before the DRP. Thus, respectfully following these decisions, we uphold that in the assessment year 2012-13, the DRP ought to have entertained the claim of the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 41 - Cited by 8 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next