75 orders · Page 1 of 2
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that crude oil production amounts to 'production' for the purpose of Section 80IC(2)(b) and that the assessee is engaged in a 'mineral based industry'. The Tribunal also found that the assessee's eligibility for Section 80IC deduction in earlier years would apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent years.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision regarding monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision regarding monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision regarding monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that CBDT circulars are binding on the Revenue. Since the appeals were filed contrary to the circular's monetary limits, they were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that CBDT circulars are binding on the Revenue. Since the appeals were filed contrary to the circular's monetary limits, they were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's policy decision on monetary limits for appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that CBDT circulars are binding on the Revenue. Since the appeals were filed contrary to the circular's monetary limits, they were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The ITAT held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were contrary to the CBDT's Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that CBDT circulars are binding on the Revenue. Since the appeals were filed contrary to the circular's monetary limits, they were dismissed in limine.
The Tribunal held that CBDT circulars are binding on the Revenue. Since the appeals were filed contrary to the circular's monetary limits, they were dismissed in limine.