254 ITR 121 (Guj) ITO v. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd.

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

…s plea of bonafide, did not give any finding on the plea of\n'bonafide'.\n5. 1. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A)\nconsidering entire facts of the case, and following the decision in the case of CIT\nvs. Nestle India Ltd. 243 ITR 435 (Delhi) accepted assessee's plea of bonafide and\ndeleted the disallowance. The Id. Counsel submits that the TRC issued to resident\nof a Contracting State is sufficient evidence that the person is a resident of that\nContracting State, thus, the assessee had no reason to doubt or dispute the same.\nIn support of his submissions, the Id. Counsel…

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

…'s plea of bonafide, did not give any finding on the plea of\n'bonafide'.\n5.1.\nThe assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A)\nconsidering entire facts of the case, and following the decision in the case of CIT\nvs. Nestle India Ltd. 243 ITR 435 (Delhi) accepted assessee's plea of bonafide and\ndeleted the disallowance. The Id. Counsel submits that the TRC issued toresident\nof a Contracting State is sufficient evidence that the person is a resident of that\nContracting State, thus, the assessee had no reason to doubt or dispute the same.\nIn support of his submissions, the Id. Counsel p…

BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.5692 और5693/िद"ी /2019(िन.व. 2007-08 और2008-09)

…essee’s plea of bonafide, did not give any finding on the plea of ‘bonafide’. 5.1. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) considering entire facts of the case, and following the decision in the case of CIT vs. Nestle India Ltd. 243 ITR 435 (Delhi) accepted assessee’s plea of bonafide and deleted the disallowance. The ld. Counsel submits that the TRC issued toresident of a Contracting State is sufficient evidence that the person is a resident of that Contracting State, thus, the assessee had no reason to doubt or dispute the same. In support of his submissions, the ld. Counsel place…

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

…'s plea of bonafide, did not give any finding on the plea of\n'bonafide'.\n5.1.\nThe assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A)\nconsidering entire facts of the case, and following the decision in the case of CIT\nvs. Nestle India Ltd. 243 ITR 435 (Delhi) accepted assessee's plea of bonafide and\ndeleted the disallowance. The Id. Counsel submits that the TRC issued toresident\nof a Contracting State is sufficient evidence that the person is a resident of that\nContracting State, thus, the assessee had no reason to doubt or dispute the same.\nIn support of his submissions, the Id. Counsel p…