section (2) of Section 274 of the Act was as follows :
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Clause (iii) of Sub-section (I) of Section ... Clause (iii) of Sub-section (1) of Section 271, if in a case falling under Clause (c) of that sub-section, the amount of income
determined has already
been deleted by her and interest deletion is consequential to the
quantum deletion for which further appeal has been recommended
vide ground ... already been deleted by the CIT(A), therefore, deletion of interest charged
u/s. 201(1A) would merely be consequential in nature. We are unable
aforesaid judgment, provisions of section
194C are more specific as compared to those of section
194J (since provisions of section 194C deal with the
very ... technical services' as in section
194J ), and hence, Section 194J , cannot apply to
payments for production of programmes. Section 194C
clearly states that payment
even section 36(1)(va) is amended and/or even explanation below
clause (va) of sub-section (1) of section 36 is also deleted ... below clause (va) of
sub-section (1) of section 36 in second proviso of section 43B (which
has been deleted by Finance Act, 2003 ), only
case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in
deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 amounting ... well, wherein he deleted the addition. Therefore, he
deleted the addition of ₹ 101,445,908/- under section 68 of
The Income Tax Act allowing ground
case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in
deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 amounting ... well, wherein he deleted the addition. Therefore, he
deleted the addition of ₹ 101,445,908/- under section 68 of
The Income Tax Act allowing ground
case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in
deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 amounting ... well, wherein he deleted the addition. Therefore, he
deleted the addition of ₹ 101,445,908/- under section 68 of
The Income Tax Act allowing ground
case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in
deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 amounting ... well, wherein he deleted the addition. Therefore, he
deleted the addition of ₹ 101,445,908/- under section 68 of
The Income Tax Act allowing ground
case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in
deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 amounting ... well, wherein he deleted the addition. Therefore, he
deleted the addition of ₹ 101,445,908/- under section 68 of
The Income Tax Act allowing ground
case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in
deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 amounting ... well, wherein he deleted the addition. Therefore, he
deleted the addition of ₹ 101,445,908/- under section 68 of
The Income Tax Act allowing ground
