CIT v. Bechtel India (P) Ltd. (2 DTR (Del) 145)

269 ITR 290High Court2004#4656 most cited
25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 40A(7)Section 43BSection 37

Judgments citing CIT v. Bechtel India (P) Ltd. (2 DTR (Del) 145)

Asianet Satellite Communications Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 475/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 40A(7)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JM ITA Nos. 474 & 475/Coch/2025 Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Asianet Satellite Communications Ltd. .......... Appellant 2A, 2nd Floor, Technopark Campus, Kariyavattom, Trivandrum. [PAN: AAECA 5548 E] vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax .......... Respondent Circle 1(1), Thiruvananthapuram. Appellant by: Shri Raghunathan S, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 04.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 08.08.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the asse…

Asianet Satellite Communications Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 474/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 40A(7)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JM ITA Nos. 474 & 475/Coch/2025 Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Asianet Satellite Communications Ltd. .......... Appellant 2A, 2nd Floor, Technopark Campus, Kariyavattom, Trivandrum. [PAN: AAECA 5548 E] vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax .......... Respondent Circle 1(1), Thiruvananthapuram. Appellant by: Shri Raghunathan S, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 04.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 08.08.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the asse…

Finastra Software Solutions (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 189/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No. 189/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Finastra Software Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., 4Th To 6Th Floor, Virgo The Deputy Building, Bagmane Commissioner Of Constellation Income Tax, Business Park Outer Circle – 3 (1)(1), Ring Road, Vs. Bangalore. Dodanekundi, Bangalore. Pan: Aaack9067G Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-03-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2022 For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Final Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2022 Was Not Communicated In The Manner Prescribed Under The Income-Tax Act, 1961 & The Rules Made Thereunder & Therefore The Proceedings Are Null & Void.

For Respondent: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar
Section 115JSection 40A(7)Section 43BSection 80GSection 92B

…proved. In support, we take strength from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 156 ITR 585 and the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs. Commonwealth Trust Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2004) 269 ITR 290. 8.5 We therefore remand this issue to the Ld.AO for necessary verification in respect of the disallowance made by the assessee towards the gratuity in any of the previous year and subsequent payment to the extent it is paid should be allowed. Accordingly, this ground raised by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. 9. Ground no. 17 is…

Decimal Technologies Private Limited, Fatehabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Fatehabad

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 460/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Addressing The Grievance Of The Assessee, It Is Relevant To Address Delay Of 2 Days Pointed Out By The Registry

For Appellant: Shri Sankalp Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudershan, Sr.DR

…, Their Lordships in the case of Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (supra) consciously followed the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Aimil’s case and concluded that the view expressed by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 290 was not being followed as it was considered to be “no longer good law in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in Alom Extrusions Ltd.” Accordingly, reliance placed by the ld. AR on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court qua the employee’s contribution stands addressed in favour of the assessee. However, the said decision has not taken i…

M/S Sushma Buildtech Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CPC/DCIT, Circle-2(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 323/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…abriks Ltd. (supra) consciously followed the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Aimil’s case and concluded that the view expressed by ITA 323 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 8 of 8 the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 290 was not being followed as it was considered to be “no longer good law in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in Alom Extrusions Ltd.” Accordingly, reliance placed by the ld. AR on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court qua the employee’s contribution stands addressed in favour of the assessee. However, the said decision has not taken i…

M/Squixotic Healthcare, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CPC/ACIT, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…briks Ltd. (supra) consciously followed the view taken ITA 322 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 8 of 8 by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Aimil’s case and concluded that the view expressed by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 290 was not being followed as it was considered to be “no longer good law in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in Alom Extrusions Ltd.” Accordingly, reliance placed by the ld. AR on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court qua the employee’s contribution stands addressed in favour of the assessee. However, the said decision has not taken i…

Manmeet Alloys Private Limited, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CPC//DCIT-Circle-V(1), Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 318/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Ms. Vidisha Vinay, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 250(6)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…abriks Ltd. (supra) consciously followed the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Aimil’s case and concluded that the view expressed by ITA 318 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 8 of 8 the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 290 was not being followed as it was considered to be “no longer good law in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in Alom Extrusions Ltd.” Accordingly, reliance placed by the ld. AR on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court qua the employee’s contribution stands addressed in favour of the assessee. However, the said decision has not taken i…

M/S Pagro Frozen Foods Private Limited, Mohali vs. DCIT, CPC//ITO-Ward-2(3), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 331/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…, Their Lordships in the case of Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (supra) consciously followed the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Aimil’s case and concluded that the view expressed by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 290 was not being followed as it was considered to be “no longer good law in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in Alom Extrusions Ltd.” Accordingly, reliance placed by the ld. AR on ITA 331 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 9 of 9 the decision of the jurisdictional High Court qua the employee’s contribution stands addressed in favour of the assessee…

Newage Fire Protection Engineers P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT Appeals National Faceless Appeal, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 680/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Mrs. Diva Singh & Shri Rifaur Rahmannewage Fire Protection Engineers Pvt. Ltd. 101, Champaklal Udyog Bhavan, Sion, Mumbai-400022. Pan: Aaccn9026C ............ Appellant Vs. Cit (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi. ............ Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Manish Sanghavi, C.A. Respondent By : Sh. Kishore Dhule, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/11/2021 Hearing Via Webex

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Sanghavi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Kishore Dhule, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 250Section 28Section 36Section 43Section 43B

…ps in the case of Nipso Polyf abri ks Ltd. (supra) consciousl y followed the view taken by the Hon'bl e Delhi High C ourt in Aimil’s case and concl uded that th e view ex pressed by the Hon 'ble Kerala Hi gh Court in CI T Vs C ommonw eal th Trust Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 290 was not bein g followed as it was considered to be “no longer good law in vie w of the judge ment of the Apex Court in Al om Extr usi ons Ltd.” Accordingly, reli ance pl aced by the l d. AR on th e decision of the jurisdictional High Court qua the employ ee’s contri buti on stands addressed in fav our of the assessee. However, the s aid decision…

Ssurya Resorts Private Limited, Dharamshala vs. DCIT, CPC/ACIT, Circle, Palampur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 194/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Return Of Income Under Section 139(1), Hence It Is An Allowable Expenditure As Per The Judgment Of Honorable Sc In The Case Of Pr. Cit Vs Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. 84 Taxmnn.Com 185

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ ‘‘ए’, च"डीगढ़ च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ च"डीगढ़ च"डीगढ़ च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH "ीमती "ीमती "दवा "ीमती "ीमती "दवा "दवा "सह "दवा "सह "सह, "याियक "सह "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, एवं एवं एवं एवं "ीमती एवं "ीमती "ीमती अ"पूणा" "ीमती अ"पूणा" अ"पूणा" गु"ा अ"पूणा" गु"ा गु"ा, लेखा गु"ा लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ ITA No. 194/CHD/2021 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील…

Bharat Financial Inclusion Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 907/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2014-15 Bharat Financial Inclusion Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan-Aaics2940J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Bharat Financial Inclusion Income-Tax, Ltd., Hyderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad Pan-Aaics2940J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date Of Hearing: 22/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/04/2021

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ection 40A(7)(b). The decisions of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Hinduja Exports vs. JCIT 9 SOT 349 (Bang), the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur in the case of Mewar Sugar Mills Limited vs. DCIT [65 lTD 163], CIT vs Commonwealth Trust Pvt. Ltd., (Ker.) [269 ITR 290], Chakola Spinning and Veaving Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (Ker.) [178 ITR 603] which have been referred to supra old merit. Respectfully following these judicial decisions, Ground No.3 in appeal is allowed.” :- 6 -: ITA Nos. 907/Hyd/2019 & 252/H/18 Bharat Financial Inclusion Ltd., Hyd. 7.2 We have considered the submissions of both the parties and pe…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Bharat Financial Inclusion Limited(Formerly Sks Microfinance Limited), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 252/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2014-15 Bharat Financial Inclusion Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan-Aaics2940J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Bharat Financial Inclusion Income-Tax, Ltd., Hyderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad Pan-Aaics2940J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date Of Hearing: 22/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/04/2021

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ection 40A(7)(b). The decisions of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Hinduja Exports vs. JCIT 9 SOT 349 (Bang), the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur in the case of Mewar Sugar Mills Limited vs. DCIT [65 lTD 163], CIT vs Commonwealth Trust Pvt. Ltd., (Ker.) [269 ITR 290], Chakola Spinning and Veaving Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (Ker.) [178 ITR 603] which have been referred to supra old merit. Respectfully following these judicial decisions, Ground No.3 in appeal is allowed.” :- 6 -: ITA Nos. 907/Hyd/2019 & 252/H/18 Bharat Financial Inclusion Ltd., Hyd. 7.2 We have considered the submissions of both the parties and pe…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2963/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2962/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2961/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2960/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2958/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2957/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2810/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2809/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज माथन, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. जयरामन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [PAN: AAACC 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी…

CIT v. Bechtel India (P) Ltd. (2 DTR (Del) 145) (269 ITR 290) — Cited in 25 Judgments | BharatTax