Asbestos Cement Ltd. v. CIT

203 ITR 358Reported decision#23534 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing Asbestos Cement Ltd. v. CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Aurangabad vs. M/S. Nath Bio-Genes (I) Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad

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

ITA 1505/PUN/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 642/Pun/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agarwal & Shri Vijay SabuFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 10(1)Section 133(6)

…aised by the Revenue, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the same constitutes making a new case by the Revenue which is not permitted in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Asbestos Cement Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 203 ITR 358, the Special Bench Mumbai Bench decision in the case of ACIT Vs. DHL Operations reported in 108 TTJ 151. DRs request for remanding : Further, referring to the request for remanding the entire issue to the file of AO, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that 16 M/s. Nath Genes (I) Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 to 2014-15 in the absence of any factua…

Income-Tax Officer vs. M/S. Nath Bio-Geners (I) Ltd., Aurangabad

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

ITA 642/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 642/Pun/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agarwal & Shri Vijay SabuFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 10(1)Section 133(6)

…aised by the Revenue, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the same constitutes making a new case by the Revenue which is not permitted in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Asbestos Cement Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 203 ITR 358, the Special Bench Mumbai Bench decision in the case of ACIT Vs. DHL Operations reported in 108 TTJ 151. DRs request for remanding : Further, referring to the request for remanding the entire issue to the file of AO, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that 16 M/s. Nath Genes (I) Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 to 2014-15 in the absence of any factua…

Dy. Comm. of Income-Tax, Cirlce-1, Nashik vs. M/S. Sidhivinayak Associates, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1350/PUN/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1350/Pun/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(2)

…ed in respect of Gat No.86. 14. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) admitted the additional ground of appeal by following the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Asbestos Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, reported as 203 ITR 358 and thereafter, adjudicated the issue raised by the assessee in additional ground for assessing income as per original return of income instead of revised return of income. The Hon'ble High Court referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT, reported as 187 ITR 688 and held tha…

Asbestos Cement Ltd. v. CIT (203 ITR 358) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax