Changepond Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

119 TTJ 18Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#6473 most cited
18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2021.

Also reported as

26 SOT 529

Judgments citing Changepond Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

HANDY WATERBASE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 422/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 422/Chny/2020, 672 & 1228/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 2

…set aside the issue to 32 I.TA. Nos.672 & 1228/Chny/2018 & 422/Chny/2020 file of the ld.CIT(A) and direct him to reconsider the claim of the assessee in light of decision of ITAT, Chennai bench in the case of Changepond Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2008] 119 TTJ 18. 19. The next issue that came up for our consideration for assessment year 2009-10 & 2011-12 is deduction u/s.10B in respect of expenses disallowed and added back to total income. The AO has denied deduction u/s.10B of the Act in respect of various additions made towards provision written back, disallowance of expenses u/s.37 of the Act and disall…

HANDY WATERBASE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 672/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 422/Chny/2020, 672 & 1228/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 2

…set aside the issue to 32 I.TA. Nos.672 & 1228/Chny/2018 & 422/Chny/2020 file of the ld.CIT(A) and direct him to reconsider the claim of the assessee in light of decision of ITAT, Chennai bench in the case of Changepond Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2008] 119 TTJ 18. 19. The next issue that came up for our consideration for assessment year 2009-10 & 2011-12 is deduction u/s.10B in respect of expenses disallowed and added back to total income. The AO has denied deduction u/s.10B of the Act in respect of various additions made towards provision written back, disallowance of expenses u/s.37 of the Act and disall…

HANDY WATERBASE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 1228/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 422/Chny/2020, 672 & 1228/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 2

…set aside the issue to 32 I.TA. Nos.672 & 1228/Chny/2018 & 422/Chny/2020 file of the ld.CIT(A) and direct him to reconsider the claim of the assessee in light of decision of ITAT, Chennai bench in the case of Changepond Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2008] 119 TTJ 18. 19. The next issue that came up for our consideration for assessment year 2009-10 & 2011-12 is deduction u/s.10B in respect of expenses disallowed and added back to total income. The AO has denied deduction u/s.10B of the Act in respect of various additions made towards provision written back, disallowance of expenses u/s.37 of the Act and disall…

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5525/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 5491 & 5492/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT, Vs. M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Circle-13(1), 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, New Delhi Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA No.5524 & 5525/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Circle-13(1), Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Resp…

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5524/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 5491 & 5492/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT, Vs. M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Circle-13(1), 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, New Delhi Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA No.5524 & 5525/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Circle-13(1), Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Resp…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5492/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 5491 & 5492/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT, Vs. M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Circle-13(1), 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, New Delhi Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA No.5524 & 5525/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Circle-13(1), Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Resp…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5491/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 5491 & 5492/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT, Vs. M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Circle-13(1), 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, New Delhi Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA No.5524 & 5525/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Circle-13(1), Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi New Delhi PAN :AAACN0332P (Appellant) (Resp…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3076/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 10BSection 29Section 32Section 32(2)Section 43A

…section 10A shall be allowed from the profits of eligible undertaking without setting off the losses /carried forward losses of other non-eligible divisions. Other cases relied upon by the appellant are as under: • Changepond Technologies (P.) Ltd. V. ACIT: 119 TTJ 18 (Chenn.) • KPIT Cummins Infosystems (Bangalore) (P) Ltd. V. ACIT: (2008) 26 SOT 529 (Bang,) • Reliq Software (P) Limited V. ITO: 125 ITO 101 (Bang.) Besides the above decisions cited in their written submissions, the appellant's AR also brought to my attention the judgement of Hon. Karnataka High Court in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd. : 246 CTR…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FIS GLOBAL RECOVERY SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4315/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92E

…ang/2009 wherein it was held that if expenses incurred in foreign currency are deducted from the export turnover the same are also to be deducted from total turnover for allowing section 10A benefit. g) In the case of KPIT Cummins Infosystem (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 26 SOT 529, the Bangalore Tribunal held that while computing deduction under section 10A of the Act, amount of telecommunication charges which is reduced from the export turnover is to be reduced from total turnover as well for the purpose of arriving at deduction in ratio export turnover to total turnover. h) The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of ACIT, Bang…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FIS GLOBAL RECOVERY SERVICE INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1410/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92E

…ang/2009 wherein it was held that if expenses incurred in foreign currency are deducted from the export turnover the same are also to be deducted from total turnover for allowing section 10A benefit. g) In the case of KPIT Cummins Infosystem (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 26 SOT 529, the Bangalore Tribunal held that while computing deduction under section 10A of the Act, amount of telecommunication charges which is reduced from the export turnover is to be reduced from total turnover as well for the purpose of arriving at deduction in ratio export turnover to total turnover. h) The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of ACIT, Bang…

INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1068/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanshri S Jayaramanit(Tp)A Nos.1068/Bang/2011 (Asst. Year 2007-08) M/S Infineon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Kalyani Platina, 3Rd Floor, Block I, #6&24, Epip Zone Phase I, Whitefiled, Bengaluru- 560 066. . Appellant Vs. The Dy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 11(4), Bengaluru. . Respondent

For Appellant: Shri KR Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priscilla Singsit, CIT
Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH- A, BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI S JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A Nos.1068/Bang/2011 (Asst. Year 2007-08) M/s Infineon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Kalyani Platina, 3rd Floor, Block I, #6&24, EPIP Zone Phase I, Whitefiled, Bengaluru- 560 066. . Appellant Vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 11(4), Bengaluru. . Respondent Appellant by : Shri KR Vasudevan, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. Priscilla Singsit, CIT Date of Hearing : 27-7-2016 Date of Pronouncement : 22-9-2016 O R D E R PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL…

M/S AFFILIATED COMPUTER SERVICES OF INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 931/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K. Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Keerthi Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…- Hyderabad Tribunal • Nous Infosystems (P) Ltd v. ITO ITA No. 1042/Bang/07(AY 2003-04). Bangalore Tribunal • ANZ operations & Technology Private limited v. CIT- ITA No. 30/Bang/200B- Bangalore Tribunal • KPIT Cummins Infosystems (Bangalore)(P) Ltd. V. ACIT - 26 SOT 529 - Bangalore tribunal • ACIT v. Honeywell Technology Solutions Lab. Pvt. Ltd (ITA No. 344 & 345 Bang./2009) - Bangalore Tribunal • 12 Technologies India Private limited v. ACIT - ITA No. 277/Bang/2009 Bangalore Tribunal Consequential interest levied under section 234B 2. The learned AO has also erred in levying interest under section 234B of Rs. 57…

M/S. DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee-company is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1302/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.Chandrashekar. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 92C

…Ltd v. ITO ITA No. 1042/Bang/07 (AY 2003-04) - Bangalore Tribunal; IT(TP)A No.1302/B/2010 Page 13 of 20 • ANZ operations & Technology Private Limited v. CIT - ITA No. 30/Bang/2008 - Bangalore Tribunal; • KPIT Cummins Infosystems (Bangalore)(P) Ltd. V. ACIT - 26 SOT 529 - Bangalore tribunal; • ACIT v. Honeywell Technology Solutions Lab. Pvt. Ltd (ITA No. 344 & 345 Bang./2009) - Bangalore Tribunal; • i2 Technologies India Private Limited v. ACIT - ITA No. 277 / Bang / 2009 - Bangalore Tribunal The appellant craves leave to add, alter and modify the above grounds during the course of the appeal. For the above and…

M/S CORE OBJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1229/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT-DR-I
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 253

…same from total turnover in computing deduction under section 1OA of the Act. •The learned AO has erred in not relying upon the decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of KPIT Cummins Infosystems (Bangalore)(P) Ltd. V. ACIT - 26 SOT 529, wherein it has been held that should the expenses be reduced from export turnover then the expenses ought to be reduced from total turnover also. •Further, the learned AO has also erred in not relying on the decision of the Special Bench of the Chennai Tribunal in the case of Sak Soft Limited v. ITO (ITA No. 691 & 19531Mds/2007) wherein it has b…

ITO 10(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. LIONBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES P.LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 290/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…operating nature and, therefore, it needs to be considered as part of the net profit margin. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the following case laws: 1) “Renaissance Jewellery (P) Ltd”, 101 ITD 380. 2) “Changepon Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT”, 119 TTJ 18 3) “Priyanka Gems vs. ACIT”, 94 TTJ 557 4) “Discover India Tours (P) Ltd.”, 104 TTJ 298 (Del.) 5. “DCIT vs. Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd.” 6. “Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT”, ITA Nos. 692 to 694(Bang)/2010 (Bang. ITAT). 7. “K. Uttamlal Exports Ltd. vs. DCIT”, 133 Taxman 248 (Mum.) 8. “Mohindra Impex vs. ACIT”, 121 Taxman 326 (Del.) 9…

LIONBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES P.LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7415/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…operating nature and, therefore, it needs to be considered as part of the net profit margin. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the following case laws: 1) “Renaissance Jewellery (P) Ltd”, 101 ITD 380. 2) “Changepon Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT”, 119 TTJ 18 3) “Priyanka Gems vs. ACIT”, 94 TTJ 557 4) “Discover India Tours (P) Ltd.”, 104 TTJ 298 (Del.) 5. “DCIT vs. Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd.” 6. “Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT”, ITA Nos. 692 to 694(Bang)/2010 (Bang. ITAT). 7. “K. Uttamlal Exports Ltd. vs. DCIT”, 133 Taxman 248 (Mum.) 8. “Mohindra Impex vs. ACIT”, 121 Taxman 326 (Del.) 9…

LIONBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO RG 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 668/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…operating nature and, therefore, it needs to be considered as part of the net profit margin. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the following case laws: 1) “Renaissance Jewellery (P) Ltd”, 101 ITD 380. 2) “Changepon Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT”, 119 TTJ 18 3) “Priyanka Gems vs. ACIT”, 94 TTJ 557 4) “Discover India Tours (P) Ltd.”, 104 TTJ 298 (Del.) 5. “DCIT vs. Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd.” 6. “Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT”, ITA Nos. 692 to 694(Bang)/2010 (Bang. ITAT). 7. “K. Uttamlal Exports Ltd. vs. DCIT”, 133 Taxman 248 (Mum.) 8. “Mohindra Impex vs. ACIT”, 121 Taxman 326 (Del.) 9…

ITO 8(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. LIONBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES P.LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1375/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…operating nature and, therefore, it needs to be considered as part of the net profit margin. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the following case laws: 1) “Renaissance Jewellery (P) Ltd”, 101 ITD 380. 2) “Changepon Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT”, 119 TTJ 18 3) “Priyanka Gems vs. ACIT”, 94 TTJ 557 4) “Discover India Tours (P) Ltd.”, 104 TTJ 298 (Del.) 5. “DCIT vs. Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd.” 6. “Think 3 Designs India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT”, ITA Nos. 692 to 694(Bang)/2010 (Bang. ITAT). 7. “K. Uttamlal Exports Ltd. vs. DCIT”, 133 Taxman 248 (Mum.) 8. “Mohindra Impex vs. ACIT”, 121 Taxman 326 (Del.) 9…

Changepond Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (119 TTJ 18) — Cited in 18 Judgments | BharatTax