66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd.

199 ITR 445High Court1993#4994 most cited

What is 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner (Appeals) cannot enhance an assessment by including income that was not considered by the Assessing Officer, either expressly or by necessary implication.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. National Co. Ltd. · 199 ITR 445 · CIT(A) jurisdiction · enhancement of assessment · Assessing Officer's consideration

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 145(3)Section 68Section 69A

Judgments citing 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd.

Suwalka and Suwalka Properties and Builders Pvt Ltd, Kota, Rajasthan vs. ACIT, Central Cirlce, Kota, Rajasthan

ITA 302/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 129Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68Section 69A

…competent to enhance the assessment taking an income which income was not considered expressly or by necessary implication by the Assessing Officer at all. Such is the mandate of the decisions of various high courts such as in CIT v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Cal), Sait Bansilal and Rangisetti Veeranna v. CIT [1972] 83 ITR 750 (AP), Sterling Construction & Trading Co. v. ITO [1975] 99 ITR 236 (Kar) and LokenathTolaram v. CIT [1986] 24 Taxman 486/161 ITR 82 (Bom). Hence issue no 11 enlisted in para no 13 of the order is decided in favour of the assessee. In view of our decision on issue no (i), issue…

M/S Ginni Goldlimited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 673/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…etent to enhance the assessment taking an income which income was not considered expressly or by necessary implication by the Assessing Officer at all. Such is the mandate of the decisions of various high courts such as in CIT vs. National Company Ltd. (1993) 199 ITR 445 (Cal), Sait Bansilal and Raggisetti Veeranna vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 750 (AP), Sterling Construction & Trading Co. vs. ITO (1975) 99 ITR 236 (Kar) and Lokenath Tolaram vs. CIT (1986) 50 CTR (Bom) 237 : (1986) 161 ITR 82 (Bom). Hence issue no 1 I enlisted in para no 13 of the order is decided in favour of the assessee. In view of our decision on iss…

The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2021AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…66 ITR 443  CIT vs. Union Tyres reported in 240 ITR 556 [Delhi] CIT vs. Union Tyres reported in 240 ITR 556 [Delhi] CIT vs. Sardarilal & Co. [2001] 251 ITR 864 (Delhi)  CIT vs. Sardarilal & Co. [  CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. (1993) 199 ITR 445 (Cal) 4.1. He referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of dgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of dgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanpur Coal Syndicate (supra), and submitted that and submitted that the issue before the Court was whether the the issue before the Court was whether the ITAT has…

M/S Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Bangalore

In the result, all these 17 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3098/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 251(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3092 to 3108/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, The Assistant Shibra Farms, Nagasandra Main Commissioner of Road, Vs. Income Tax, Near 8th Mile, Tumkur Road, TDS-CPC, Bangalore – 560 073. Ghaziabad. PAN: AAECP8149G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ganesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 11.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019…

M/S Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Bangalore

In the result, all these 17 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3097/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 251(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3092 to 3108/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, The Assistant Shibra Farms, Nagasandra Main Commissioner of Road, Vs. Income Tax, Near 8th Mile, Tumkur Road, TDS-CPC, Bangalore – 560 073. Ghaziabad. PAN: AAECP8149G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ganesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 11.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019…

M/S Promoptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these 17 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3096/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 251(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3092 to 3108/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, The Assistant Shibra Farms, Nagasandra Main Commissioner of Road, Vs. Income Tax, Near 8th Mile, Tumkur Road, TDS-CPC, Bangalore – 560 073. Ghaziabad. PAN: AAECP8149G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ganesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 11.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019…

M/S Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these 17 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3095/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 251(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3092 to 3108/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, The Assistant Shibra Farms, Nagasandra Main Commissioner of Road, Vs. Income Tax, Near 8th Mile, Tumkur Road, TDS-CPC, Bangalore – 560 073. Ghaziabad. PAN: AAECP8149G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ganesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 11.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019…

M/S Promptec Renewable Energy Solution Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these 17 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3094/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 251(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3092 to 3108/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, The Assistant Shibra Farms, Nagasandra Main Commissioner of Road, Vs. Income Tax, Near 8th Mile, Tumkur Road, TDS-CPC, Bangalore – 560 073. Ghaziabad. PAN: AAECP8149G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ganesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 11.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019…

M/S Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these 17 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3093/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 251(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3092 to 3108/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, The Assistant Shibra Farms, Nagasandra Main Commissioner of Road, Vs. Income Tax, Near 8th Mile, Tumkur Road, TDS-CPC, Bangalore – 560 073. Ghaziabad. PAN: AAECP8149G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ganesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 11.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019…

M/S Promptec Renewable Energy Solution Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these 17 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3092/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 251(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 3092 to 3108/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Promptec Renewable Energy Solutions Private Limited, The Assistant Shibra Farms, Nagasandra Main Commissioner of Road, Vs. Income Tax, Near 8th Mile, Tumkur Road, TDS-CPC, Bangalore – 560 073. Ghaziabad. PAN: AAECP8149G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ganesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 11.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019…

Mdlr Estates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8215/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…istry 34 ITR 342 (Bom) 4. CIT vs Union Tyres 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) 5. CIT vs. Sardari Lai & Co. 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) 6. CIT vs Changanlal Kailas & Co. 19 Taxmann 536 (Mad) 7. CIT vs. Associated Garments Makers 197 ITR 350 (Rajasthan) 8. CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta) 9. CIT vs. BP Sherafuddin 399 ITR 524 (Kerela) 22. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that transactions entered into by two sister concerns cannot be a valid ground for addition :- 1. ITA No. 596/Kol/2011 M/s Pluto Finance (P) Ltd 2. ITA No. 1840/Mum/2005 Shri Jayesh P. Choksi v. ACIT 3. Zaheer Mauritius v. DIT (IT) 27…

Mdlr Builders P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8214/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…istry 34 ITR 342 (Bom) 4. CIT vs Union Tyres 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) 5. CIT vs. Sardari Lai & Co. 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) 6. CIT vs Changanlal Kailas & Co. 19 Taxmann 536 (Mad) 7. CIT vs. Associated Garments Makers 197 ITR 350 (Rajasthan) 8. CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta) 9. CIT vs. BP Sherafuddin 399 ITR 524 (Kerela) 22. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that transactions entered into by two sister concerns cannot be a valid ground for addition :- 1. ITA No. 596/Kol/2011 M/s Pluto Finance (P) Ltd 2. ITA No. 1840/Mum/2005 Shri Jayesh P. Choksi v. ACIT 3. Zaheer Mauritius v. DIT (IT) 27…

Lalith Kumar Dosi, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2676/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

Lalit Kumar Dosi, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaiabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2675/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

Pachisia Plastics Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2670/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

Pachisia Plastics Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2669/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

Pachisia Plastics Private Limited, Kanakapura vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2668/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

Pachisia Plastics Private Limited, Kanakapura vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2667/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

Pachisia Plastics Private Limited, Kanakpura vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2666/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

Lalit Kumar Dosi, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2660/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…/2018 Page 8 of 11 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC). 2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 445 (Calcutta). 12. On the parity of ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that the action of the CIT(Appeals) in declaring return of TDS filed by the assessee as non est was not the subject matter of appeal and the subject matter of appeal was only with regard to correctness of levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act. In that view of…

66 ITR 443 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. National Co. Ltd. (199 ITR 445) — Cited in 23 Judgments | BharatTax