What is Avani Exports v. CIT authority for?

A substantive amendment to tax law can only operate retrospectively if it benefits the assessee; it cannot be applied retrospectively to withdraw a benefit or detrimentally affect assessees, even if their assessments are pending or concluded.

How many judgments cite Avani Exports v. CIT?

56 judgments on BharatTax cite Avani Exports v. CIT (348 ITR 391), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Avani Exports v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 115BBE, Section 132(4), Section 153A, Section 28, Section 69B.

Avani Exports v. CIT (348 ITR 391)

Shri Ramesh Chandra S.Patel, Ahmedabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD)-I, Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal, is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3500/AHD/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Oct 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 254Section 80HSection 80ISection 80L

…- application of mind as it appears from the records before us. It also appears from the records that the Hon’ble ITAT in its order dated 24.01.2013 followed the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Avani Exports reported in 348 ITR 391 in terms of which the authorities below ought to have allowed the deduction u/s 80HHC on the export incentive of DEPB. Neither the AO, nor the Learned CIT(A) has not took into consideration this particular aspect of the matter and hence we are of the considered view to remit the issue to the file of the Learned AO to render the benefit to the ass…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Atul Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and two appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1310/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kediaasstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited Dcit (Osd), Range-1 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aabca 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03

For Respondent: Shri H.V. Gujjar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 154

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 AND "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited DCIT (OSD), Range-1 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03 AND Asstt.Year 2003-04 ACIT (OSD), Range-1 Atul Limited Ahmedabad. 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M (Appellant) (Responent) Revenue by : S…

Atul Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and two appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 13/AHD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kediaasstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited Dcit (Osd), Range-1 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aabca 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03

For Respondent: Shri H.V. Gujjar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 154

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 AND "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited DCIT (OSD), Range-1 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03 AND Asstt.Year 2003-04 ACIT (OSD), Range-1 Atul Limited Ahmedabad. 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M (Appellant) (Responent) Revenue by : S…

Atul Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and two appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1196/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kediaasstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited Dcit (Osd), Range-1 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aabca 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03

For Respondent: Shri H.V. Gujjar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 154

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 AND "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited DCIT (OSD), Range-1 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03 AND Asstt.Year 2003-04 ACIT (OSD), Range-1 Atul Limited Ahmedabad. 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M (Appellant) (Responent) Revenue by : S…

The DCIT(OSD) Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Atul Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and two appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2576/AHD/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kediaasstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited Dcit (Osd), Range-1 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aabca 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03

For Respondent: Shri H.V. Gujjar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 154

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt.Year 2002-03 Asstt.Year 2003-04 AND "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Atul Limited DCIT (OSD), Range-1 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Ahmedabad. Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M Asstt.Year 2002-03 AND Asstt.Year 2003-04 ACIT (OSD), Range-1 Atul Limited Ahmedabad. 3rd Floor, Ashoka Chambers Vs. Rasala Marg, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AABCA 2390 M (Appellant) (Responent) Revenue by : S…

M/S. Drishti Apparels, Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4683/DEL/2016[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No-4683/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2001-02) Drishti Apparels vs ITO 180, SEctot-6, Ward-23(4) IMT Manesar New Delhi Gurgaon AAAFD2361B Revenue by Sh. Sunil Arora, CA Assessee by Sh. Abhishek Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14.05.2019 Date of Pronouncement 17.05.2019 ORDER PER K. NARSIMHA CHARY, J.M. Challenging the order dated 29/06/2016 in Appeal No. 191/14-15 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, New Delhi (“CIT(A)”) for A.Y. 2012-13, a…

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S. Jubilant Organosyes Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 4975/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 43(1)

…ourt. 118. In view of above facts and after hearing parties it was noted that now issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by decision of honourable Supreme Court in 277 CTR 460 wherein decision of honourable Gujarat High Court in Avani exports vs. CIT 348 ITR 391 was confirmed. In view of above facts, we direct assessee to file revised computation of deduction allowable to it before learned AO, who after verification allow claim of assessee, if found in accordance with law. Accordingly, ground number 7 of appeal of assessee is allowed. 119. Accordingly, appeal of assessee for assessment year 2004 – 05 in…

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S Jubliant Organosys Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2596/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 43(1)

…ourt. 118. In view of above facts and after hearing parties it was noted that now issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by decision of honourable Supreme Court in 277 CTR 460 wherein decision of honourable Gujarat High Court in Avani exports vs. CIT 348 ITR 391 was confirmed. In view of above facts, we direct assessee to file revised computation of deduction allowable to it before learned AO, who after verification allow claim of assessee, if found in accordance with law. Accordingly, ground number 7 of appeal of assessee is allowed. 119. Accordingly, appeal of assessee for assessment year 2004 – 05 in…

Jubilant Organosys Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Moradabad

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2497/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 43(1)

…ourt. 118. In view of above facts and after hearing parties it was noted that now issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by decision of honourable Supreme Court in 277 CTR 460 wherein decision of honourable Gujarat High Court in Avani exports vs. CIT 348 ITR 391 was confirmed. In view of above facts, we direct assessee to file revised computation of deduction allowable to it before learned AO, who after verification allow claim of assessee, if found in accordance with law. Accordingly, ground number 7 of appeal of assessee is allowed. 119. Accordingly, appeal of assessee for assessment year 2004 – 05 in…

M/S. Kaushlya Export, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1563/AHD/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Dec 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1563 & 1564/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2001-02 & 2002-03)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr.D.R

Section 154Section 251Section 80H

…uiry about the contentions of assessee in the interest of natural justice. 3. The learned C.I.T.(Appeals) has further erred in law by not appreciating the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Avani Exports and Other vs. CIT reported in 348 ITR 391 (Guj) in proper perspective. 3.1 The learned C.I.T.(Appeals) failed to consider the finding of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court that the amendment to sec.80HHC by taxation law (Second Amendment Act, 2005) is discriminating being a case of 'palpable arbitrariness' and failed to satisfy the test of article 1 4 of the constitution and further held…

Maheshraj Chemicals Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 791/AHD/2012[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2018AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.791/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 1999-2000 Dcit, Mahesraj Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4, Vs. 141, Phase Ii, Gidc, Vatva, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-382330 Pan:Aabcm0424C

For Appellant: Smt Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Talwani, Sr.DR

Section 234BSection 271Section 28Section 36Section 80H

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.791/AHD/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 1999-2000 DCIT, Mahesraj Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4, Vs. 141, Phase II, GIDC, Vatva, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-382330 PAN:AABCM0424C (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Smt Urvashi Shodhan, AR Revenue by : Shri Vinod Talwani, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/11/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 06/12/2018 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The ca…

The Dharmapuri District Co Operative Milk Producers Union Ltd, Krishnagiri vs. Addl CIT Range 1, Salem

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1585/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri S. Nataraja, JCIT

Section 250(6)Section 28Section 80H

…ame proportion as the export turnover bears to the total turnover of the business carried on by the assessee.” The Ld.AR further relied in the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case M/s. Avani Exports And Others Vs. CIT And Others reported in 348 ITR 391 which was not considered by the Ld.Revenue Authorities while deciding the issue. It was therefore pleaded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld.AO for fresh consideration. 5. Similarly the Ld.AR submitted before us that with respect to the issue of provision for replacement of defective ‘O’ rings, the assessee may be given one m…

Vardhman Holdings Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT

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

ITA 88/CHANDI/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2018AY 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Goyal, CIT DR

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 80HSection 80I

…to section 80HHC(3) had been struck down and as such the assessee was entitled to deduction u/s 80HHC on premium on sale of DEPB /REP licences. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports Vs. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 349. The A.Y.2003-04 Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Guru Nanak Exports, Phagwara Vs. ACIT Jalandhar (2012) CWP NO.11328 of 2009 and Vijay Silk House (Bangalore) Ltd Vs. UOI, WP No.2446/2010 (Bombay High Court). It was also pointed out that in the case of sister concern i.e. M/s Vardhman Textiles (supra) the I.T.A.T. had allowed…

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Holdings Ltd., Ludhiana

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

ITA 118/CHANDI/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2018AY 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Goyal, CIT DR

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 80HSection 80I

…to section 80HHC(3) had been struck down and as such the assessee was entitled to deduction u/s 80HHC on premium on sale of DEPB /REP licences. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports Vs. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 349. The A.Y.2003-04 Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Guru Nanak Exports, Phagwara Vs. ACIT Jalandhar (2012) CWP NO.11328 of 2009 and Vijay Silk House (Bangalore) Ltd Vs. UOI, WP No.2446/2010 (Bombay High Court). It was also pointed out that in the case of sister concern i.e. M/s Vardhman Textiles (supra) the I.T.A.T. had allowed…

Nekkanti Sea Foods Ltd., Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1634/HYD/2016[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…s before us are 1999-2000, 2002-03 and 2003-04 and therefore, the said conditions are not applicable to the A.Ys before us. For this proposition, he placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports v. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 391 (Guj.) which has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in (2015) 58 Taxmann.com 100(S.C). He submitted that the said decision has also been followed and confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the subsequent case in the case of Union of India vs.Paliwal Overseas (P) Ltd reported in (2017) 77 Taxmann.com 35 (S.C). The learned C…

Nekkanti Sea Foods Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1628/HYD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…s before us are 1999-2000, 2002-03 and 2003-04 and therefore, the said conditions are not applicable to the A.Ys before us. For this proposition, he placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports v. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 391 (Guj.) which has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in (2015) 58 Taxmann.com 100(S.C). He submitted that the said decision has also been followed and confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the subsequent case in the case of Union of India vs.Paliwal Overseas (P) Ltd reported in (2017) 77 Taxmann.com 35 (S.C). The learned C…

Nekkanti Sea Foods Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1627/HYD/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…s before us are 1999-2000, 2002-03 and 2003-04 and therefore, the said conditions are not applicable to the A.Ys before us. For this proposition, he placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports v. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 391 (Guj.) which has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in (2015) 58 Taxmann.com 100(S.C). He submitted that the said decision has also been followed and confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the subsequent case in the case of Union of India vs.Paliwal Overseas (P) Ltd reported in (2017) 77 Taxmann.com 35 (S.C). The learned C…

Institute of Haematology, New Delhi vs. ITO (E), Ward- 1(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 453/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 453/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Institute Of Haematology, Vs Income Tax Officer(E), 11/6-B, Shanti Chambers, Pusa Ward-1(2), Road, New Delhi-110005 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati4626P Assessee By : Sh. T. R. Talwar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 02.08.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-40, Delhi. 2. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee In This Appeal Relates To The Sustenance Of Penalty Of Rs.68,598/- Levied By The Ao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

For Appellant: Sh. T. R. Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 453/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Institute of Haematology, Vs Income Tax Officer(E), 11/6-B, Shanti Chambers, Pusa Ward-1(2), Road, New Delhi-110005 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAATI4626P Assessee by : Sh. T. R. Talwar, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 31.08.2018 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 02.08.2017 of ld. CIT(A)-40, Delhi. 2. The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal re…

M/S. Shalimar Enterprises, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 108/DEL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 28Section 80H

…ng: Deduction u/s 80HHC has been claimed on DEPB profits which is not allowable in your case in view of Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 2005." At the outset, it is pointed out that the Gujarat High Court had in Avani Exports v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 348 ITR 391 held that the said amendment was void, as contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution on account of its retrospective operation. The amendment had restricted benefits to a class of assessees whose turnover was less than 10 Crores. The Revenue's appeal to the Supreme Court and the appeals of the assessees with respect to the substantive part of the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sava Enterprises, Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3850/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 80H

…such was illegal. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, it was requested that the addition ofRs.1,66,77,703/- be deleted. 8.3 I have carefully perused the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports vs. CIT, 348 ITR 391. It is seen from the first Para of the order of the Hon'ble Court that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had transferred these matters pending before various High Courts to the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. The first Para of the Order of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court is as under :- "All these writ applications were taken up together pursuant to the…

Avani Exports v. CIT

What is Avani Exports v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Avani Exports v. CIT

Shri Ramesh Chandra S.Patel, Ahmedabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD)-I, Ahmedabad

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Atul Ltd., Ahmedabad

Atul Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

Atul Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

The DCIT(OSD) Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Atul Ltd., Ahmedabad

M/S. Drishti Apparels, Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S. Jubilant Organosyes Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S Jubliant Organosys Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

Jubilant Organosys Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Moradabad

M/S. Kaushlya Export, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(4), Ahmedabad

Maheshraj Chemicals Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad

The Dharmapuri District Co Operative Milk Producers Union Ltd, Krishnagiri vs. Addl CIT Range 1, Salem

Vardhman Holdings Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Holdings Ltd., Ludhiana

Nekkanti Sea Foods Ltd., Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

Nekkanti Sea Foods Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

Nekkanti Sea Foods Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

Institute of Haematology, New Delhi vs. ITO (E), Ward- 1(2), New Delhi

M/S. Shalimar Enterprises, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sava Enterprises, Delhi