How many judgments cite CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd.?

107 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd. (317 ITR 207), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 139(1), Section 143(1), Section 90, Section 154, Section 250, Section 44AB.

CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd.

317 ITR 207High Court2009#1013 most cited

What is CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd. authority for?

For claiming relief under Chapter VI-A deductions like Section 80IB or 80IA, the audit report in Form 10CCB is not mandatory to be filed with the return of income, but can be submitted before the assessment is completed.

107

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems · 317 ITR 207 · Form 10CCB · audit report filing · Section 80IA · Section 80IB · before assessment completion · Section 90 · DTAA · foreign tax credit · Azadi Bachao Andolan

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90 Section 154 Section 250 Section 44AB Section 80IA Section 80IA(7)

Issues it is cited on

section 295 section 80ia(7)section 80j(6a)section 90a azadi bachao andolan section 91 section 90(2)foreign tax credit section 80ac section 139(5)section 80a section 288

Judgments citing CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd.

Manav Malik, Noida vs. ACIT Circle 5(2)(2), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2293/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2019-20 Manav Malik, Vs Acit, B-146, Sector-19, Circle 5(2)(2), Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh – 201 301. Uttar Pradesh. Pan: Apzpm1646L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Kirti Bindal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024

For Appellant: Ms Kirti Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

…td [2016] 72 taxmann.com 16 (Allahabad) • CIT, Central Circle vs American Data Solutions India (P.) Ltd [2014] 45 taxmann.com 379 (Karnataka) • CIT-II vs Mantec Consultants (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi) • CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial…

Copral Energy Private Limited, Krishnagiri vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Salem

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

ITA 767/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.767/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Copral Energy Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Plot No.12, Sipcot, Phase-Ii, Circle-1(1), Krishnagiri District-635 109. Salem. [Pan: Aaacc 8486 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Krishnan Ramaswamy

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.767/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s.Copral Energy Pvt. Ltd., The DCIT, Plot No.12, SIPCOT, Phase-II, Circle-1(1), Krishnagiri District-635 109. Salem. [PAN: AAACC 8486 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri K. Madhusudhan, CA ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Krishnan Ra…

Roots Industries India Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle (1), Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.46/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Roots Industries India Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner – R.K.G. Industrial Estate, Of Income Tax, Ganapathy, Corporate Circle-(1), Coimbatore-641 006. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aabcr 0314 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Nahar, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.46/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s.Roots Industries India Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner – R.K.G. Industrial Estate, of Income Tax, Ganapathy, Corporate Circle-(1), Coimbatore-641 006. Coimbatore. [PAN: AABCR 0314 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Suraj Nahar, CA ""यथ" क"…

Arathi Vinay Patil, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3)(4), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 604/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 44ASection 80Section 801ASection 80I

…stand satisfied if audit report is furnished during assessment proceedings. In this regard, the assessee relied on following case laws: 1. PCIT VS Surya Merchants Ltd. [2016] 72 taxmann.com 16 (Allahabad) 2. CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) LTd. v. [2009] 317 ITR 207 (KAR) 3. CIT v. Shahzedanand Charity Trust [1997] 228 ITR 292/[1998] (Punjab and Haryana) 4. Murali Export House v. CIT [1999] 238 ITR 257 (Calcutta) 5. CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P.) Ltd. [2009] 317 ITR 249/178 Taxman 422 (Delhi) 6. CIT v. Medicaps Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 554 .(Madhya Pradesh) 2.16. The assessee submitted that his case is much…

Moog Motion Controls Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 184/BANG/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Moog Motion Controls Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Site No.42-43, Doraisanipalya Circle – 4(1)(1), Village, Vs. Bengaluru. Opp. Oracle (Kalyani Magnum), Bilekahalli, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aadcm 3828 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Srinivas K. P, Ca Revenue By : Shri. V. Parithivel, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K. P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 90

…td [2016] 72 taxmann.com 16 (Allahabad) • CIT, Central Circle vs American Data Solutions India (P.) Ltd [2014] 45 taxmann.com 379 (Karnataka) • CIT-II vs Mantec Consultants (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi) • CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Page 17 of 19 Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they…

Deepak Shimoga Padmaraju, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 239/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, Advocate byFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2021-22 Deepak Shimoga Padmaraju, The Asst. Director of 12, 3rd Floor, 4th Cross, Income Tax, 14th Main, Adarsha Layout, Vs. ITO, CPC, Hongasandra, Bangalore. Bangalore South, Bommanahalli S.O Bangalore-560 068. PAN : BAQPS 0277 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee : Smt. Sheetal, Advocate by Revenue by : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department Date of hearing : 12.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 17.04.2024 O R D E R PER SHRI LAXMI PRASAD S…

Uma Maheshwar Rao Vendavelli, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5 (3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 34/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri.Monish Sawkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Subramanian.S, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

…. [2016] 72 taxmann.com 16 (Allahabad) ♦ CIT, Central Circle v. American Data Solutions India (P.) Ltd [2014] 45 taxmann.com 379 (Karnataka) ♦ CIT-II v. Mantec Consultants (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi) ♦ CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial…

Annaswamy Sekhar, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Non Corporate Circle-4, Coimbatore

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1000/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1000/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Annaswamy Sekhar Dcit बनाम 33, Krishna Colony, Singanallur, Non-Corporate Circle-4, / Vs. Coimbatore-641 005. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajups-1902-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri H. Yeswanth Kumar (Ca)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 06-02-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20-02-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeswanth Kumar (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 80I

…it is well settled by a number of judicial precedents that before the assessment is completed, the declaration could be filed. In fact, the said issue came to be decided by the Karnataka High Court in the case in CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) LTD. [2009] 317 ITR 207(Kar.), wherein it was held that when a relief is sought for under Section 80IB of the Act, there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to file return accompanied by the audit report, thereby, holding that the same is not mandatory. Therefore, it is clear that before the assessment is completed if such report is filed, no fault could be fou…

Power and Energy Consultants India Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-19(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3420/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganeshpower & Energy Consultants Vs. Ito, India Pvt. Ltd, Ward-19(1), House No. U-136, Vikas Marg, Delhi Shakarpur, New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacg3625J Assessee By : Shri Harish Chaudhary, Ca Shri Mohit Chaudhary, Ca Ms. Neetu Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/02/2024

For Appellant: Shri Harish Chaudhary, CaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90Section 90ASection 91

…Ltd [2016] 72 laxmann.com 16 (Allahabad) • CIT. Central Circle vs American Data Solutions India (P.) Ltd [2014] 45 taxmann.com 379 (Karnataka) •CIT-II vs Mantec Consultants (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi) •CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial…

Nira vs. Inh Kishoresinh Gehlot, Indiavs.CPC, Bangalore (Present Jurisdiction -Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad), Gujarat

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1068/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1068/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Niravsinh Kishoresinh Cpc बनाम/ Gehlot Bangalore Vs. Shivam Vasant Chowk, Present Jurisdiction - Dharmaj, Petlad Dist Income Tax Officer Anand, Anand, Gujarat Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad 388430 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajtpg6241P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Balaji V., Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. Dr 01/02/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/02/2024 O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Appellant Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.10.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Chennai (‘Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Intimation Order Dated 20.03.2020 Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Have Heard The Rival Submissions Made By The Respective Parties & We Have Also Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record.

For Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 90

Sanjay Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 54(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 652/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.652/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 बनाम Sanjay Kukreja, Acit A-362, Defence Colony, Vs. Circle-54(1), New Delhi. New Delhi.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 44ASection 80Section 80I

…it is well settled by a number of judicial precedents that before the assessment is completed, the declaration could be filed. In fact, the said issue came to be decided by the Karnataka High Court in the case in CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) LTD. [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Kar.), wherein it was held that when a relief is sought for under Section 80IB of the Act, there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to file return accompanied by the audit report, thereby, holding that the same is not mandatory. Therefore, it is clear that before the assessment is completed if such report is filed, no fault could be fo…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Devesh Mohan Nayel, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 740/BANG/2023[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Vs. Shri. Devesh M Nayel, Circle – 2(2)(1), 301, Rennaisance Regalia 95, Main Road, 15Th Cross, Bengaluru. Malleshwaram, Malleshwaram S.O, Bengaluru North, Bengaluru – 560 003. Pan : Aespn 6617 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Veerabasavana Gowda S, Ca Revenue By : Shri. V. Parithivel, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Veerabasavana Gowda S, CAFor Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

Pratap Technocrats Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 225/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80J

…it is well settled by a number of judicial precedents that before the assessment is completed, the declaration could be filed. In fact, the said issue came to be decided by the Karnataka High Court in the case in CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) LTD. [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Kar.), wherein it was held that when a relief is sought for under Section 80IB of the Act, there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to file return accompanied by the audit report, thereby, holding that the same is not mandatory. Therefore, it is clear that before the assessment is completed if such report is filed, no fault could be fo…

Ambibuzz Technologies LLP, Mumbai vs. ITO, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1084/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Dharmvir D Yadav (Sr. DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

…td [2016] 72 taxmann.com 16 (Allahabad)  CIT, Central Circle vs American Data Solutions India (P.) Ltd [2014] 45 taxmann.com 379 (Karnataka)  CIT-II vs Mantec Consultants (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi)  CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. 8 A.Y. 2020-21 Ambibuzz Technologies LLP Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of…

Kazya Watanabe, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 312/BANG/2023[2021-2022]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore06 Jun 2023AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2021-22 Mr. Kazuya Watanabe, The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Plot No.21, Toyota Kirloskar Auto Parts Centralized Processing Centre, Private Limited, Vs. Bengaluru. Bidadi Industrial Area, Ramanagara, Bengaluru – 562 109. Pan : Adfpw 5263 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sarwan Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Sarwan Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

…r vs Surya Merchants Ltd [2016] 72 com 16 (Allahabad) CIT, Central Circle vs American Data Solutions India (P.) Ltd [2014] 45 com 379 (Karnataka) CIT-II vs Mantec Consultants (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi) CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial…

Sanjeev Agrawal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 71/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 4Section 5Section 6Section 90

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 71/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19. cuke Shri Sanjeev Agarwal, DCIT Central Circle-4, Vs. R-21, Raj Aangan, NRI Colony, Jaipur. Haddi Ghati Marg, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. AATPA 4920 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rohan…

Ajay Kumar Mishra, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1835/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Ajay Kumar Mishra, Vs Dcit, B-12, The Icon, Dlf City, Circle-1(1), Phase-5, Gurgaon, Gurgaon. Haryana-122009. Pan-Aowpm7493R Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri D.K.Pandey, Ca & Shri Manish Pandey, Ca Respondent By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.04.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234ASection 90

…Ltd [2016] 72 taxmann.com 16 (Allahabad) - CIT, Central Circle vs American Data Solutions India (P) Ltd [2014] 45 taxmann.com 379 (Karnataka) - CIT-II vs Mantee Consultants (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi) - CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems (p.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). We submit that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the ass…

Jeevan Kalyana Sadhan Kendra, Nuapada vs. ITO (Exemption), Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 73/CTK/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack02 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2015-16 Jeevan Jeevan Kalyana Kalyana Sadhana Sadhana Vs. Ito (Exemption), Ito (Exemption), Kendra, Nuapada. Kendra, Nuapada. Sambalpur Sambalpur Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaaaj 9932 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Ar Natabar Panda, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /0 03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 02 /0 /03/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), , Nfac, Nfac, Delhi, Delhi, Dated10.3.2022 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1040548106(1) For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Shri Natabar Panda, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri Natabar Panda, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri Natabar Panda, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared For The Revenue. S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

Section 12A

…condoned. It was the prayer that the Assessing Officer may be directed to consider the audit report filed in Form No.10B. Ld AR has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems Pvt Ltd., (2009) 317 ITR 207 (Kar), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court following the decision of the Hon’ble P&H High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shahzedanand Charity Trust, 228 ITR 292 (P&H), wherein, it has been held that the audit report u/s.12A(b) which is the audit report in Form 10B can be furnished at the appellate stage also, has held that the audit report having been…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Chinthakunta Ramesh Sridevi, Hyderabad

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 699/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.E. Sunil Babu, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…80IA(7) would be met. In support of this, he relied on the following decisions: iii) CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P.) Ltd, [2009] 178 Taxman 422 (Delhi). iv) CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems(P.) Ltd., [2009] 317 ITR 307 (Kar). v) CIT v. Medicaps Ltd., [2010] 323 ITR 554 (M.P.). vi) CIT v. Sanjay Kumar Bansal [2013] 35 taxmann.com (Uttarakhand). vii) Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Fortuna Foundation Engineers & Consultants (P.) Ltd. [2017] 81 taxmann.com 189 (AII) 25.1 Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd., [2015] 376 I…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Gvpr Engineers Limited, Hyderabad

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 754/HYD/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.E. Sunil Babu, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I