Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India

298 ITR 400High Court2008#12615 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India

THE AD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALAPPUZHA vs. N S S KARAYOGAM, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 505/COCH/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri.T.M.Sreedharan, Advocate
Section 143Section 148Section 153Section 254

…be considered afresh, time limit prescribed u/s 153(2A) of the I.T.Act is attracted. The Hon’ble High Court had followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India and others [(2008) 298 ITR 400 (P&H)] and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhan Textile P. Ltd. [(2008) 300 ITR 176 (Delhi)]. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, after extracting the findings of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, reads as follows:- “12. The resultant position therefore is that, even in a case where only one issue has been direc…

SRI.T.ABDUL MAJEED PROPRIETOR,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 74/COCH/2017[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Dec 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. C.B.M.Warrier, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 153Section 250Section 254Section 263Section 264

…be considered afresh, time limit prescribed u/s 153(2A) of the I.T.Act is attracted. The Hon’ble High Court had followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India and others [(2008) 298 ITR 400 (P&H)] and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhan Textile P. Ltd. [(2008) 300 ITR 176 (Delhi)]. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, after extracting the findings of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, reads as follows:- “12. The resultant position therefore is that, even in a case where only one issue has been direc…

SRI.T.ABDUL MAJEED PROPRIETOR,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 73/COCH/2017[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Dec 2018AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. C.B.M.Warrier, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 153Section 250Section 254Section 263Section 264

…be considered afresh, time limit prescribed u/s 153(2A) of the I.T.Act is attracted. The Hon’ble High Court had followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India and others [(2008) 298 ITR 400 (P&H)] and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhan Textile P. Ltd. [(2008) 300 ITR 176 (Delhi)]. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, after extracting the findings of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, reads as follows:- “12. The resultant position therefore is that, even in a case where only one issue has been direc…

SRI.T.ABDUL MAJEED PROPRIETOR,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 72/COCH/2017[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Dec 2018AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. C.B.M.Warrier, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 153Section 250Section 254Section 263Section 264

…be considered afresh, time limit prescribed u/s 153(2A) of the I.T.Act is attracted. The Hon’ble High Court had followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India and others [(2008) 298 ITR 400 (P&H)] and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhan Textile P. Ltd. [(2008) 300 ITR 176 (Delhi)]. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, after extracting the findings of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, reads as follows:- “12. The resultant position therefore is that, even in a case where only one issue has been direc…

SRI.T.ABDUL MAJEED PROPRIETOR,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 70/COCH/2017[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Dec 2018AY 1994-95

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. C.B.M.Warrier, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 153Section 250Section 254Section 263Section 264

…be considered afresh, time limit prescribed u/s 153(2A) of the I.T.Act is attracted. The Hon’ble High Court had followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India and others [(2008) 298 ITR 400 (P&H)] and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhan Textile P. Ltd. [(2008) 300 ITR 176 (Delhi)]. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, after extracting the findings of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, reads as follows:- “12. The resultant position therefore is that, even in a case where only one issue has been direc…

SRI.T.ABDUL MAJEED PROPRIETOR,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 71/COCH/2017[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Dec 2018AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. C.B.M.Warrier, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 153Section 250Section 254Section 263Section 264

…be considered afresh, time limit prescribed u/s 153(2A) of the I.T.Act is attracted. The Hon’ble High Court had followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India and others [(2008) 298 ITR 400 (P&H)] and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhan Textile P. Ltd. [(2008) 300 ITR 176 (Delhi)]. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, after extracting the findings of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, reads as follows:- “12. The resultant position therefore is that, even in a case where only one issue has been direc…

VIVEK FINANCIAL FOCUS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 17(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6972/DEL/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goel, C.A. and Shri Rishab Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 250Section 254Section 263Section 264

…pports the case of the Assessee here. The decisions of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gulabchand Motilal v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1988] 174 ITR 117 (MP), the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India [2008] 298 ITR 400 (P&H) and Deep Chand Jain v. ITO [1984] 145 ITR 676 (P&H), and the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Paul Noel Rodrigues [2015] 231 Taxman 811 (Kar), all hold likewise. The Kerala High Court in Patel R.P. v. ACIT 2015 (5) KHC 370 held that Section 12 ITA.No.6972/Del./2017 M/s. Vivek Financial Focus Ltd., New Delhi. 153 (2A) of the Act would appl…

BECHTEL INDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT,SPECIAL RANGE-2, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6131/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Addl. Cit, Special Range-2, M/S. Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd., 418, Naurang House, 21 K.G. Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacb0298A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. & Ms. Vrinda Tulshan, Adv. Respondent By Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 23.11.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153(3)Section 154Section 254Section 271Section 92C

…Court fully supports the case of the Assessee here. The decisions of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gulabchand Motilal v. CIT [19881 174 ITR 117/IT 9871 34 Taxman 456 (MP), the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Bharti Engg. Corpn. v. Union of India [20081 298 ITR 400/[20061 154 Taxman 487 fPuni & Har.) and Deep Chand Jain v. ITO [19841 145 ITR 676/[ 19831 15 Taxman 522 (Punj. & Har.), and the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Paul Noel Rodrigues [20151 231 Taxman 811/57 taxmann.com 12 (Kar.), all hold likewise. The Kerala High Court in R.P. Patel v. ACIT [2015] 5 KHC 370 (Ker.) held that 15 Section 15L (2A) of t…

Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India (298 ITR 400) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax