Search ITAT High Courts Landmark Cases

Search Supreme Court Landmark Cases Sections Phrases Insights AI Research History

Loading ITAT cases…

BharatTax.net

Income tax case law: ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) orders from every bench, with High Court and Supreme Court judgments.

Quick Links

Income Tax Case Law Search
Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments
Pricing
GST Case Laws

About

BharatTax makes Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders searchable for legal research. Searching is free, and a free account reads 10 full judgments a month.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved. · Privacy · Terms

ITAT Hyderabad Judgments — September 2018 | BharatTax

Home/ITAT Judgments/Hyderabad/2018/September

ITAT Hyderabad Judgments — September 2018

78 orders · Page 1 of 2

SRINIVASA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT STUDIES,CHITOOR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER,(TDS), TIRUPATI

ITA 946/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2018AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals for default as the assessee did not appear on the hearing date and defects in the appeals were not rectified. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer is empowered to pass a separate order for levying late filing fees.

SRINIVASA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT STUDIES,CHITOOR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER,(TDS), TIRUPATI

ITA 948/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2018AY 2015-16Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals for default as the assessee did not appear on the hearing date and defects in the appeals were not rectified. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer is empowered to pass a separate order for levying late filing fees.

SRINIVASA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT STUDIES,CHITOOR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER,(TDS), TIRUPATI

ITA 947/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2018AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals for default as the assessee did not appear on the hearing date and defects in the appeals were not rectified. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer is empowered to pass a separate order for levying late filing fees.

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR vs KOMALI KHADER, TADIPATRI, TADIPATRI

ITA 1960/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLEI1, ANANTAPUR vs GANDIKOTA RAMESH, TADIPATRI

ITA 1971/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs D VENKATANNA, TADIPATRI

ITA 1973/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

NARABOYINA MADHUSUDHANA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1368/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs K RANGAIAH, TADIPATRI

ITA 1974/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs A RAVI SEKHAR, TADIPATRI

ITA 1964/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

BALA KRISHNA KAMPARAJU, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1339/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

SANJEEVAIAH VALKURU, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1350/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

NARABOYENA GANGARAJU, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1369/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

SREENIVASULU BANDELA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1325/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

VENKATANNA DARA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1335/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

DASARI KESHANNA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ITO, WARD-1, PRODDATUR, PRODDATUR

ITA 1337/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

AVVARI RAVI SEKHAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1347/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

BOLLAM CHINNA PULLAIAH TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1354/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

RAMESH GANDIKOTA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1357/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

SALVADI SEKHAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1362/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs B C PULLAIAH, TADIPATRI, TADIPATRI

ITA 1955/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs Y CHANDRA SEKHAR, TADIPATRI, TADIPATRI

ITA 1956/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs K BALA KRISHNA, TADIPATRI

ITA 1965/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs K MADHU KUMAR, TADIPATRI

ITA 1966/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTHAPUR vs M DAMODHAR, TADIPATRI

ITA 1972/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

KOMALI NAGAYYA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1370/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

RAGENI GANGADHAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1323/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

CHANNA GURAPPA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1328/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

CHANNA GURAPPA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1329/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

DASARI KESHANNA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1336/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

KOPPELAKONDA PRATAP, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1348/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

BANDARU LAKSHMI NARAYANA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1353/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

BOLLU LAKSHMI NARAYANA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1355/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

GOONI VENU GOPAL, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1356/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

GADIMANKHAJA MOHIDDIN, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, HYDERABAD

ITA 1365/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs G VENU GOPAL, TADIPATRI

ITA 1961/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

PINJARI ABDUL SALEEM, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1371/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs B.LAKSHMI NARAYANA, TADIPATRI

ITA 1954/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

RAGENI GANGADHAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1324/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

BANDELA NAGA RANGAIAH, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1327/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

GADNAMPALLI GAMPANNA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1330/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

GADNAMPALLI GAMPANNA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1331/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

YERRAMMAGARI RAMULU, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1340/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

VIKKISALA SOMUSUNDAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1341/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

KASULA SURESH, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1345/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

KOPPELAKONDA PRATAP, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1349/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

VAKKAPELLA MASTAN VALI, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1351/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

MANGALA DHAMODHAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1359/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

NARABOYINA CHINNA OBULESU, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1360/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

NARABOYINA CHINNA OBULESU, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1361/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

GADIMANKHAJA MOHIDDIN, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs ITO, WARD-1, PRODDATUR, PRODDATUR

ITA 1366/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO could not simultaneously conclude that income was taxable in the hands of the deductor and also that it had escaped assessment in the hands of the deductee-assessees. Therefore, the reassessment for AY 2009-10 was invalid.

Showing 1–50 of 78 · Page 1 of 2

← Prev12 Next →