3. CIT v. ASHOK KUMAR SONI

262 ITR 633High Court2003#1091 most cited

What is 3. CIT v. ASHOK KUMAR SONI authority for?

An item not taxable by law cannot be made taxable merely because the assessee offered it under a misconception of fact or law. Charging provisions must be strictly construed, with any ambiguity favoring the assessee, and tax authorities should assist assessees to levy only legitimate taxes, even allowing new claims on appeal.

101

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mayank Poddar HUF · 262 ITR 633 · misconception of facts · misconception of law · assessee admission · not binding if contrary to law · charging section strict construction · beneficial interpretation · duty of tax authorities · appellate authority new claims · non-taxable item · Wealth Tax Act

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 153ASection 234BSection 143(2) of the Income-tax ActSection 143(3) of the Income-tax ActSection 250 of the Income-tax ActSection 73 of the Income-tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 131(1)panchnamainterest under section 234bsection 234bsection 234section 131section 23incriminating materialsearch and seizuresection 153section 153asection 15

Judgments citing 3. CIT v. ASHOK KUMAR SONI

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA vs. MILESTONE FINSTOCK PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1180/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2012-13 Ito, Ward-12(1), Kolkata…..…………..………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Milestone Finstock Pvt. Ltd..……...…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 62A, Hazra Road, Kol-700019. [Pan: Aaccm0280B] Appearances By: Shri Mohit Mrinal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N S Saini, Ar & Priyanka Salarpuria, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 07, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 24, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.09.2020 Of The Cit(Appeals)-4, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012–13. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 1075 Days & The Revenue Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay. The Contents Of The Said Affidavit Are As Under: Milestone Finstock Pvt. Ltd

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 73

…or on not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes due are collected and Calcutta High Court in the case of Maynak Poddar HUF Vs. Wealth Tax Officer reported in 262 ITR 633 (Calcutta) and also on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 187 ITR 688 (SC) where the Court held that the appellate authorities are competent enough to consider the same and take the decision for claims even raised for the first time before them. We find that the ld. CIT(A) wh…

BANGALORE RAJASHEKHARA MEGHA L/R OF LATE KARI THIMMEGOWDA RAJASHEKHARA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1494/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Padmavathy S & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 153Section 153A

…w, then the same cannot be made taxable merely because the assessee has offered the same under misconception of facts and law. A reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case Mayank Poddar (HUF) v. WTO reported in (2003) 262 ITR 633, wherein the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in paras 4 to 11 has observed as under:- “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. In our view whether an item of property is chargeable to tax or not is dependent on the true construction of s. 3 of the WT Act, in the strict sense it is enacted. There cannot be any ambiguity in a c…

BANGALORE RAJASHEKHARA MEGHA L/R OF LATE KARI THIMMEGOWDA RAJASHEKHARA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1493/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Padmavathy S & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 153Section 153A

…w, then the same cannot be made taxable merely because the assessee has offered the same under misconception of facts and law. A reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case Mayank Poddar (HUF) v. WTO reported in (2003) 262 ITR 633, wherein the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in paras 4 to 11 has observed as under:- “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. In our view whether an item of property is chargeable to tax or not is dependent on the true construction of s. 3 of the WT Act, in the strict sense it is enacted. There cannot be any ambiguity in a c…

BANGALORE RAJASHEKHARA MEGHA L/R OF LATE KARI THIMMEGOWDA RAJASHEKHARA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1492/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Padmavathy S & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 153Section 153A

…w, then the same cannot be made taxable merely because the assessee has offered the same under misconception of facts and law. A reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case Mayank Poddar (HUF) v. WTO reported in (2003) 262 ITR 633, wherein the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in paras 4 to 11 has observed as under:- “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. In our view whether an item of property is chargeable to tax or not is dependent on the true construction of s. 3 of the WT Act, in the strict sense it is enacted. There cannot be any ambiguity in a c…

BANGALORE RAJASHEKHARA MEGHA L/R OF LATE KARI THIMMEGOWDA RAJASHEKHARA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

ITA 1491/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Padmavathy S & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 153Section 153A

…w, then the same cannot be made taxable merely because the assessee has offered the same under misconception of facts and law. A reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case Mayank Poddar (HUF) v. WTO reported in (2003) 262 ITR 633, wherein the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in paras 4 to 11 has observed as under:- “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. In our view whether an item of property is chargeable to tax or not is dependent on the true construction of s. 3 of the WT Act, in the strict sense it is enacted. There cannot be any ambiguity in a c…

BANGALORE RAJASHEKHARA MEGHA L/R OF LATE KARI THIMMEGOWDA RAJASHEKHARA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1490/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms.Padmavathy S & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 153Section 153A

…w, then the same cannot be made taxable merely because the assessee has offered the same under misconception of facts and law. A reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case Mayank Poddar (HUF) v. WTO reported in (2003) 262 ITR 633, wherein the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in paras 4 to 11 has observed as under:- “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. In our view whether an item of property is chargeable to tax or not is dependent on the true construction of s. 3 of the WT Act, in the strict sense it is enacted. There cannot be any ambiguity in a c…

BANGALORE RAJASHEKHARA MEGHA L/R OF LATE KARI THIMMEGOWDA RAJASHEKHARA ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1) , BENGALURU

ITA 1489/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms.Padmavathy S & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 153Section 153A

…w, then the same cannot be made taxable merely because the assessee has offered the same under misconception of facts and law. A reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case Mayank Poddar (HUF) v. WTO reported in (2003) 262 ITR 633, wherein the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in paras 4 to 11 has observed as under:- "4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. In our view whether an item of property is chargeable to tax or not is dependent on the true construction of s. 3 of the WT Act, in the strict sense it is enacted. There cannot be any ambiguity in a ch…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EMAMI AGROTECH LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1107/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148A

…was held by the Tribunal by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Limited –vs.- CIT (229 ITR 383) as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Maynak Poddar (HUF) –vs.- WTO (262 ITR 633) that his jurisdiction was rightly exercised by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in entertaining the additional ground raised by the assessee claiming exclusion of capital subsidy received by way of sales tax remission under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme. We, therefore, find the objection raised on behalf of the revenue in this regard to be unsustainable…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EMAMI AGROTECH LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1097/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148A

…was held by the Tribunal by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Limited –vs.- CIT (229 ITR 383) as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Maynak Poddar (HUF) –vs.- WTO (262 ITR 633) that his jurisdiction was rightly exercised by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in entertaining the additional ground raised by the assessee claiming exclusion of capital subsidy received by way of sales tax remission under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme. We, therefore, find the objection raised on behalf of the revenue in this regard to be unsustainable…

THE UNITED THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-2, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 518/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Vargese, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Karthik, D.R
Section 11(5)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ITA No.518/Bang/2023 The United Theological College, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 The United Theological College No.63, Miller’s Road ITO (Exemptions) Benson Town Ward-2 Vs. Bangalore 560 046 Bangalore PAN NO : AABFT6448G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Joseph Vargese, A.R. Respondent by : Shri D.S. Karthik, D.R. Date of Hearing : 30.11.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 01.12.2023 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by assesse…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BRAHMAPUTRA CRACKER AND POLYMER LIMITED....b

ITA/16/2022HC Gauhati11 Apr 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

Section 260A

…e same to tax in its return of income. It is already well settled that there is no estopped against the statute. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Maynak Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO reported in (2003) 262 ITR 633 (Cal). It is also well settled that the revenue cannot take advantage of ignorance of the provisions of the Act on the part of the assesse and on the contrary, the revenue is expected to educate the assesse and not to deprive the legitimate deductions which is otherwise entitled for the assesse. Hence respectfully Page No.# 11/14 foll…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 2/GTY/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

…Koshti vs. CIT [276 ITR 165] – Gujarat High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (x) CIT (Central) vs. Devi Films Private Limited [1981 (11) TMI 10 - [1983] 143 ITR 386 - Madras High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (xi) Mayank Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO [262 ITR 633] - Calcutta High Court (at page 929 of the CIT(A) Order)” 81. Ld. CIT(A) has further referred to (at page 921 of his order) the well settled proposition that ld. CIT(A) and the Hon’ble ITAT have power to allow deduction/exemption to an assessee to which he was entitled even though claim was not made by such an assessee in his Original Income Tax…

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 43/GTY/2022[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

…Koshti vs. CIT [276 ITR 165] – Gujarat High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (x) CIT (Central) vs. Devi Films Private Limited [1981 (11) TMI 10 - [1983] 143 ITR 386 - Madras High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (xi) Mayank Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO [262 ITR 633] - Calcutta High Court (at page 929 of the CIT(A) Order)” 81. Ld. CIT(A) has further referred to (at page 921 of his order) the well settled proposition that ld. CIT(A) and the Hon’ble ITAT have power to allow deduction/exemption to an assessee to which he was entitled even though claim was not made by such an assessee in his Original Income Tax…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 39/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

…Koshti vs. CIT [276 ITR 165] – Gujarat High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (x) CIT (Central) vs. Devi Films Private Limited [1981 (11) TMI 10 - [1983] 143 ITR 386 - Madras High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (xi) Mayank Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO [262 ITR 633] - Calcutta High Court (at page 929 of the CIT(A) Order)” 81. Ld. CIT(A) has further referred to (at page 921 of his order) the well settled proposition that ld. CIT(A) and the Hon’ble ITAT have power to allow deduction/exemption to an assessee to which he was entitled even though claim was not made by such an assessee in his Original Income Tax…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 38/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

…Koshti vs. CIT [276 ITR 165] – Gujarat High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (x) CIT (Central) vs. Devi Films Private Limited [1981 (11) TMI 10 - [1983] 143 ITR 386 - Madras High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (xi) Mayank Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO [262 ITR 633] - Calcutta High Court (at page 929 of the CIT(A) Order)” 81. Ld. CIT(A) has further referred to (at page 921 of his order) the well settled proposition that ld. CIT(A) and the Hon’ble ITAT have power to allow deduction/exemption to an assessee to which he was entitled even though claim was not made by such an assessee in his Original Income Tax…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 37/GTY/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

…Koshti vs. CIT [276 ITR 165] – Gujarat High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (x) CIT (Central) vs. Devi Films Private Limited [1981 (11) TMI 10 - [1983] 143 ITR 386 - Madras High Court (at page 928 of the CIT(A) Order) (xi) Mayank Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO [262 ITR 633] - Calcutta High Court (at page 929 of the CIT(A) Order)” 81. Ld. CIT(A) has further referred to (at page 921 of his order) the well settled proposition that ld. CIT(A) and the Hon’ble ITAT have power to allow deduction/exemption to an assessee to which he was entitled even though claim was not made by such an assessee in his Original Income Tax…

HOOBATHALAI MATHAGOWDER SUGUMAR ,WELLINGTON vs. PCIT-2, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 201/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Dec 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. Marudhu Pandyan, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 263

…up by PCIT. 4.1 The ld.AR for the assessee however relied on the following decisions: (i) Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of S.R. Koshti vs. CIT, 276 ITR 165 (ii) Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Maynak Poddar (Huf) vs Wealth Tax Officer, 262 ITR 633 (iii) ITAT, Chennai Third Member decision in the case of R. Natarajan vs. ACIT, 135 ITD 55 4.2 We have gone through these case law cited by the ld.AR and noted that these case laws are for considering alternative claim or on some other aspects not related to the issue before us. Hence, these cases are factually distinguishable and not relevant…

AMAR ADAK ,HOWRAH vs. A.C.I.T.CIRCLE-46, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2642/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 68

…dated 18.05.1965, wherein it has been stated that the AO shall not take advantage of the ignorance of the assessee as to his rights etc. He also relied on the judgement of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Mayank Poddar (HUF) vs. WTO reported in 262 ITR 633 for the proposition that there is no estoppel against law. He also on the real income theory and submitted that sundry creditors and customers which are admittedly never in existence, cannot be added u/s 68 of the Act. 2.3. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed these contentions of the assessee by holding as follows: “3.2 The A/R of the appellant has not su…

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EMAMI BIOTECH LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2564/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 115J

…was held by the Tribunal by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Limited –vs.- CIT (229 ITR 383) as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of MaynakPoddar (HUF) –vs.- WTO (262 ITR 633) that his jurisdiction was rightly exercised by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in entertaining the additional ground raised by the assessee claiming exclusion of capital subsidy received by way of sales tax remission under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme. We, therefore, find the objection raised on behalf of the revenue in this regard to be unsustainable…

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EMAMI BIOTECH LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2563/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 115J

…was held by the Tribunal by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Limited –vs.- CIT (229 ITR 383) as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of MaynakPoddar (HUF) –vs.- WTO (262 ITR 633) that his jurisdiction was rightly exercised by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in entertaining the additional ground raised by the assessee claiming exclusion of capital subsidy received by way of sales tax remission under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme. We, therefore, find the objection raised on behalf of the revenue in this regard to be unsustainable…

Showing 1–20 of 101 · Page 1 of 6