How many judgments cite 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd.?

39 judgments on BharatTax cite 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. (341 ITR 180), spanning 2014 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 263, Section 147, Section 148, Section 10(37), Section 145A(b).

341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd.

341 ITR 180High Court2012#3014 most cited

What is 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner cannot invoke revisionary powers under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer has made an enquiry and taken a possible view, even if another view is also possible. Revision is only permissible when there is an absence of enquiry.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd · 341 ITR 166 · Section 263 · revisionary power · absence of enquiry · two views possible · Assessing Officer · Commissioner of Income Tax

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263 Section 147 Section 148 Section 10(37)Section 145A(b)Section 151 Section 56(2)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

section 141 section 282a(1)section 194la section 56(i)(ccv)section 145a(b)section 145b section 45(5)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)section 80p(2)(i)section 10(37)doctrine of merger

Judgments citing 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd.

Smt. Kumari Shiwangi, Solan vs. Chief CIT (OSD), Shimla

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1380/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1380/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-15 Smt. Kumari Shiwangi, The Chief Cit((Osp), बनाम Mc Complex, Shimla Near Mohan Park, Solan Hp "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Cvhps4283H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80CSection 80I

…83 ITR (Trib) (S.N.) 75 (Mum) ; ITA No. 3001/Mum/2019. iii). Promod Kesharichand Shah v Pr. CIT in ITA No. 43/Surat/2018 iv). CIT v Anil Kumar Sharma reported in [2011] 335 ITR 83 (Del.) v). CIT Vs Hindustan Marketing & Advertising Co. Ltd. reported in [2012] 341 ITR 180 (Delhi). 8 1380-Chd-2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) – Kumari Shiwangi, Solan, HP vi). CIT v Late Shri Vijay Kumar Koganti reported in [2020] 195 DTR 428 (Mad). vii). DTE Exports Pvt. Ltd. v Pr.CIT. 4.0 Per contra, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental Representative) justified the action of the Ld. PCIT in setting aside the issue and argued tha…

Mahalaxmi Kundan Meena Diamond Jewellers P Ltd, Jaipur vs. Pr. CIT-1, Jaipur

ITA 119/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Avdesh Kumar (CIT)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…s facts of the case with the assessee the order of the CIT to direct fresh assessment by going deeper into the matter would not form a valid or legal basis to exercise jurisdiction under section 263" CIT Vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. (2012) 341 ITR 180 (Delhi) The Learned CIT is not empowered to direct the Assessing Officer simply to cause further enquiries, when each and every fact of the case is laid thread bare before him. He should have himself decided the issues instead of shirking the responsibility. "The revisionary jurisdiction cannot be allowed to be exercised by the Commissioner eithe…

Ganga Acrowools Limited, Ludhiana vs. Pr, CIT-1, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 196/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.196/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Nangia, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “A”, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.196/CHD/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Ganga Acrowools Limited, The PCIT-1, बनाम 249, Industrial Area A Ludhiana Ludhiana 141003 Punjab "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAACG8869Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing though video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee by : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Nangia, CIT DR सुनवाईक"तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 23.02.2022 उद…

Tarun Jain, Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

ITA 144/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “B”, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.140/CHD/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Sanjay Jain, The PCIT, बनाम 196-197, Ganpati Enclave, (Central) Dabwali Road, Bathinda Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: ABJPJ5318E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 141/CHD/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sanjay Jain and Sons, The PCIT, बनाम 196-197, Ganpati Enclave, (Central) Dabwali Road,Bathinda Ludhiana "थाय…

M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.., Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 143/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.143/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., The Pcit, बनाम 18-A, 2Nd Floor, (Central) North Avenue Road, Ludhiana West Punjab Bagh, New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “B”, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.143/CHD/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., The PCIT, बनाम 18-A, 2nd Floor, (Central) North Avenue Road, Ludhiana West Punjab Bagh, New Delhi "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AACCB0185A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing though video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee by : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate. राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue by : Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR सु…

Rajni Jain, Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

ITA 142/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

Shri Sanjay Jain, Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

ITA 140/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

M/S Fortune Metaliks Limited, Ludhiana vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 82/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR Khanna

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…by an order u/s 263 on the grounds of lack of enquiry or inadequate ITA 82 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2016-17 Page 14 of 35 enquiry. Similar view, it was submitted, has been held by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Hindustan Marketing & Advertising Co. Ltd. 341 ITR 180 available at pages 49 to 62 of the Paper Book ) for the proposition that the revisionary authority without pointing out any flaw cannot direct the AO to go deeper into the matter. Reliance was also placed upon Loil Continental Foods Ltd. Vs Pr. CIT I TA No. 577/CHD/2019 (CHD-Tribunal) available at page 63 to 99 of the Paper Book ) wherein eve…

Andritz Hydro P Ltd, Bhopal vs. Pr CIT-1, Bhopal

ITA 199/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing

Section 115JSection 253Section 263

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Virtual hearing ITA No.198 & 199/Ind/2020 Assessment Year:2014-15 & 2015-16 Andritz Hydro Private Limited Pr. CIT-1 D-17, Mandideep, Mpakvn Bhopal बनाम/ Industrial Area, Mandideep, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.AABCV2466R Appellant by Shri Rahul Kaul, AR Respondent by Shri Rajeeb Jain, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 16.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 29.10.2021 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: The above captioned appeals fi…

K R Satyanarayana vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the orders passed by the Commissioner of

ITA/192/2015HC Karnataka21 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(2)Section 154Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 50CSection 80C

…', 8 (2014) 366 ITR 593 (CAL), 'CIT VS. SUNSCAM AUTO LTD.', (2011) 332 ITR 167 (DEL), 'CIT VS. ARVIND JEWELLERS', (2003) 259 ITR 502 (GUJ), 'CIT VS. DEVELOPMENT CREDIT BANK', (2010) 323 ITR 206 and 'CIT VS. MARKETING AND ADVERTISING CO.', (2012) 341 ITR 180. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the assessee neither in the return of income nor in financial statements disclosed that he is carrying on the real estate business and therefore, the conclusion arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the properties held by the assesseea are in the nature of stock in t…

M/S. Dwarkadhis Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Bhiwani vs. CIT, Hisar

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

ITA 3097/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2006-07 Dwarkadhis Buildwell Pvt. Ltd Cit C/O N. K. Jain, Advocate Naya Vs Hisar Bazar, Bhiwani Pan No. Aaccd1951E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Naveen Gupta Ca Shri Ashu Goyal, Ca Sh. Ashok Kumar Jain, Ca Respondent By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/04/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 01/07/2019 Order

Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 263

…his mind to issue in question, commissioner could not invoke section 263 merely because he has different opinion. 15. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Company Limited reported in 341 ITR 180 he submitted that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the said decision has held that where the ITO had made reasonable detailed enquiries, had collected relevant material and discussed various facts of case with assessee, order of CIT to direct fresh assessment by going deeper into the matter would not form a valid or legal basis to exercise jurisdi…

Nuwave Esolutions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3231/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamblenuwave Esolutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Cit(A) 3Rd Floor, District Centre, Delhi-V Dda Building, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Aabcn5790Q (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 40Section 92

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Nuwave Esolutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT(A) 3rd Floor, District Centre, Delhi-V DDA Building, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi AABCN5790Q (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) Appellant by Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Somil Aggarwal, Advs Respondent by Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 20.12.2018 Date of Pronouncement 27.12.2018 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 28/3/2013 passed by CIT(A)- New Delhi for Assessmen…

Vijay Kundu, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 808/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 808/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Vijay Kundu, Vs Pr. Cit, C/O Raj Kumar & Associates, Delhi-21, Cas, L-7A (Lgf), South Ext., New Delhi Part-2, New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajnpk7914P Assessee By : Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.03.2016 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-21, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 263

…enue. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " DCIT Vs Jyoti Foundation 357 ITR 388 (Del.) " Jagjit Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT 60 ITD 295 (Del.) " Y. V. Ramana Vs CIT (2017) 183 TTJ (Vishaka) 337 " CIT Vs Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. 341 ITR 180 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd. 332 ITR 167 (Del.) " CIT Vs Anil Kumar Sharma 38 DTR 305 (Del.) " Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. 243 ITR 83 (SC) " CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 332 ITR 332 (Del.) " DIT Vs Jyoti Foundation 357 ITR 388 (Del.) " CIT Vs Gabrial India Ltd. 203 ITR 108 (Bom.) 18. In his rival submissions, the ld. CIT DR strongly suppo…

Sh. Gaurav Bhatia, Kotdwar vs. CIT, Dehradun

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

ITA 1730/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Miss S. Kambleassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Gaurav Bhatia Vs. The Cit Bhatia Bhawan, Sitapur Devi Road Dehradun Kotdwar (Applicant) (Respondent) (Pan: Afypb 4513 J)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…eous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Such revisionary power can be exercised by the ld. CIT only when there is absence of any enquiry: a) CIT Vs. Leisure Wear Export Ltd 341 ITR 166 [Del] b) CIT Vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd 341 ITR 180 [DEL] c) Fab India Overseas P. Ltd Vs. CIT 60 DTR 240 [DEL] d) Dy. CIT Vs. Insilco Ltd 59 DTR 364 [DEL] e) CIT Vs. Anil Kumar Sharma 335 ITR 83 [DEL] f) Vashti Management Services Vs. ITO 137 TTJ 35 [DEL] g) Raj Shyama Construction P. Ltd Vs. ACIT 135 TTJ 33 [DEL] h) CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd 332 ITR 231 [DEL] i) CIT Vs. Hindustan Coco Cola…

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, impugned order dated 31

ITA 2193/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Anadi N Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chander, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 194Section 263

…IT For PUBLICATION (AM) (JM) 15. Sonal Garments vs. JCIT 95 ITD 363 16. Marico Industries Ltd. vs. ACIT 27 SOT 73 17. DIT vs. Jyoti Foundation ; 357 ITR 388 18. CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. 341 ITR 166 19. CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Ltd. 341 ITR 180 20. CIT vs. Ashish Rajpal 320 ITR 674 21. CIT vs. Contimeters Electricals (P) Ltd. 317 ITR 249 (D) Ld. CIT (DR) appearing for Revenue strongly supported the impugned order u/s 263 of the Act and relied on it heavily. He also drew our attention to order of apex court in the case of CIT vs. Amitabh Bachchan 384 ITR 200 (SC) to support the impugne…

Tirupati Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 3316/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Tirupati Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Cit, Plot No. D, District Centre, Central-Ii, Paschim Vihar, E-2, Jhandewalan Ext. New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aadct5825H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ved Jain & P. Srivastava, Ca Department By: Ms. Archena S. Awasthi, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 25 .02.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 17 :05.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Assessee Has Questioned Validity Of Revisional Order Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 On Several Grounds.

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain & P. Srivastava, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Archena S. Awasthi, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “D” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI L.P. SAHU Assessment Year: 2007-08 Tirupati Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal CIT, Plot No. D, District Centre, Central-II, Paschim Vihar, E-2, Jhandewalan Ext. New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AADCT5825H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: S/Shri Ved Jain & P. Srivastava, CA Department by: Ms. Archena S. Awasthi, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 25 .02.2016 Date of pronouncement: 17 :05.2016 ORDER PER I.C. SUDHIR: JUDICIAL MEMBER The assessee has questioned validity of revisional order passed under section 263 of the In…

M/S Southern Ferro Steels Ltd., Dharwad vs. ITO, Hubli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 429/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Raom/S.Southern Ferro Steels Ltd. No.172, Kiadb, Belur Industrial Estate, Belur, Dharwad. … Appellant Pan:Aalcs 7704 H Vs.

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devadas, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43(1)

…the issue of valuation. He has asserted that revision is not permitted on the ground that inquiry should have been more detailed. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing & Advertising Co.Ltd. (341 ITR 180)(Del); ii. CIT vs. Giridhar Lal (258 ITR 331) (Raj); iii. CIT vs. Arvind Jewellers (259 ITR 502)(Gau.); and iv. CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd. (203 ITR 108(Bom.) Page 5 of 8 5. On the other hand, learned DR submitted that the AO did not apply his mind on the issue of valuation of fixed assets which were already used by the seller in the light of Exp…

The Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. G Pulla Reddy Chritable Trust

ITTA/192/2015HC Telangana08 Oct 2015

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

Commissioner of Income Tax-XII vs. Indo Rub Industries

ITA/19/2013HC Delhi01 Oct 2014

Section 143(3)Section 201Section 263

…Section 263 of the Act and set aside the assessment. Inter-alia, the ld. AR relied upon decisions in CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. 332 ITR 167(Del.) (Delhi); CIT vs. Leisure Exports Ltd., 341 ITR 166(Del.), CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing & Advertising Co. Ltd., 341 ITR 180 (Del.); and CIT vs. Vikas Polymers, 341 ITR 537 (Delhi).” 2014:DHC:5209-DB ITA 19/2013 Page 6 of 13 Accepting the said assertion, the order under Section 263 of the Act, stands struck down. 6. The issue raised is whether or not the Assessing Officer…