How many judgments cite CIT v. Calcutta Export Company?

93 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Calcutta Export Company (404 ITR 654), spanning 2018 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Calcutta Export Company come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 40(a)(ia), Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 139, Section 1961, Section 197.

CIT v. Calcutta Export Company

404 ITR 654Supreme Court of India2018#1222 most cited

What is CIT v. Calcutta Export Company authority for?

The amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010, making TDS remittance before the due date under Section 139(1) a condition for deduction, is retrospective from AY 2005-06. Procedural lapses should not lead to excessive disallowances, particularly when payment has been made to a resident.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Calcutta Export Company · Section 40(a)(ia) · Section 139(1) · retrospective effect · TDS remittance · disallowance · procedural lapses · Finance Act 2010

Also reported as

93 Taxmann.com 51255 Taxmann 293

Sections most often in play

Section 40(a)(ia)Section 143(3)Section 250 Section 139 Section 1961 Section 197 Section 201 Section 263

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

bright line test amp expenditure comparable uncontrolled price method section 80jja section 92(1)section 80jjaa cost plus method functional analysis section 92c(3)section 92f management fees benchmarking analysis

Judgments citing CIT v. Calcutta Export Company

Shree Choudhary Transport Co vs. Income Tax Officer

C.A. No.-007865-007865 - 2009Supreme Court29 Jul 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

Section 40

…o be applied retrospectively and from the date of introduction of sub-clause (ia) to Section 40(a) of the Act. The learned counsel has developed this argument by relying on the decision in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Calcutta Export Company: (2018) 404 ITR 654, wherein this Court has held the remedial amendment of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Finance Act, 2010 to be retrospective in nature and applicable from the date of insertion of the said provision. 10.4. Learned counsel for the appellant has lastly submitted that the result of applying the provisions in question to the entire payment prac…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Manmandir Enterprises

In the result, we do not find any merit in this case,

ITA/405/2012HC Karnataka29 Jun 2020

Bench: The Due Date For

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 260Section 260ASection 40

…revenue at length. We find that the issued involved in this appeal is no longer res integra and has been answered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATTA VS. CALCUTTA EXPORT COMPANY, (2018) 404 ITR 654 (SC). The aforesaid decision has also been followed by this court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MANGALORE VS. SANTOSH KUMAR 5 SHETTY, (2014) 227 TAXMAN 170 (KARNATAKA). In view of aforesaid enunciation of law, the substantial question of law framed by this court is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In t…

M/S A Y Garments International Private Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA/422/2012HC Karnataka29 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 254(2)Section 260Section 260ASection 40Section 6

…e assessee has approached this court. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the assessee submitted that the first substantial question of law is no longer res integra, as the same has already been answered by Supreme Court in CIT VS. CALCUTTA EXPORT COMPANY, 404 ITR 654 (SC), wherein it has been held that amendment in Section 40(a)(ia) brought about by Finance Act, 2010 is curative in nature and has retrospective operation. In view of aforesaid enunciation of law, the first substantial question of law framed by a bench of this court has to be answered in favour of the assessee and the remaining questions o…

Brig. Narayan Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT-5(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, ITA No.30/CTK/2017 is partly allowed for

ITA 230/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.30/Ctk/2017 & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.230/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. Dcit, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/S Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, Id Market, Irc Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Abapn 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Sahoo, Ca िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/02/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Two Appeals, One Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Dated 27.10.2016 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.143(3) Of The Act & Another Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 14.04.2019 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Act. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.30/Ctk/2017, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds :-

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Sahoo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 43BSection 44A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.30/CTK/2017 AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.230/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/s Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, ID Market, IRC Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : ABAPN 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Sahoo, CA िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR सुन…

Brig.Narayan Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, ITA No.30/CTK/2017 is partly allowed for

ITA 30/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Sahoo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 43BSection 44A

Shri Jaikishan Parchani, Indore vs. The ITO-5(5), Indore

Appeal are allowed for

ITA 673/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Mar 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(ii)Section 56(2)(vii)

…[ITA No.673/Ind/2019] [Shri Jaykishan Parchani, Indore] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Jaykishan Parchani ITO-5(5) S/o Shri Arjun Parchani, 123, Indore बनाम/ B.K. Sindhi Colony, Vs. Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.AIHPP0129L Appellant by Shri Rajesh Mehta, CA Respondent by Shri R.P. Mourya, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 03.03.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 06.03.2020 आदेश / O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of the CIT(A)-I, Indore dated 06.03.2019 pertaining to the assessment year 2…

Manoj Mittal, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4596/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Anand, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

Section 2(22)(e)Section 50Section 50CSection 69

…n the case of Jitendra R. Patel Vs. DCIT ITA no. 1932/Ahd/2013 ITAT Ahmedabad 21. Copy of judgement in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal land Mark Township P. Ltd. 377 ITR 635 (Del) Delhi High Court 22. Copy of judgement in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Export Company 404 ITR 654 (SC) Supreme Court of India (D.1) In addition, copy of order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 09.08.2019, in the case of Chandra Prakash Jhunjhunwala vs. DCIT for A.Y. 2014-15 ITA No. 2351/Kol/2017 was also filed from the assessee’s side. Further, a synopsis was also filed from the assessee side relevant portion of which is reproduced as…

M/S Khandelwal Steel & Pipes, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Cuttack

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

ITA 138/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.138/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Khandelwal Steel & Pipes, Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), 614, Bomikhal, Cuttack Puri Rd Bhubaneswar Bhubanewswar-751010 स्थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Aagfk 7718 R (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Shadiram Sharma, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Shadiram Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K.Lenka, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 263Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 44

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.138/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/s Khandelwal Steel & Pipes, Vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1), 614, Bomikhal, Cuttack Puri Rd Bhubaneswar Bhubanewswar-751010 स्थायी लेखा सं./PANNo. : AAGFK 7718 R (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Shadiram Sharma, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri J.K.Lenka, DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 23/12/2019 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncemen…

Vivek Agarwal, Jharsuguda vs. ITO, Jharsuguda

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 85/CTK/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Binod Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 194ASection 194CSection 40

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.85/CTK/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-2011) Vivek Agarwal, Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Marwari Pada, Jharsuguda स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : AGHPA 3341 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Binod Agarwal, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 19/11/2019 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncement : 20/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu…

M/S. Ncc-Mskel(Jv), Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 248/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2008-09 Agrawal Khurana (Jv) Ito (Osd) Msk House Vs. Range-9 Nr. Passport Office Ahmedabad. Ambawadi. Aaaaa 8372 Q "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2008-09 Ncc Mskel(Jv) Ito (Osd) Msk House Vs. Range-9 Nr. Passport Office Ahmedabad. Ambawadi. Aaaan 4514 J

For Respondent: Sonia Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 40

…sessee was not accepted by both the Revenue authorities, hence, these appeals before the Tribunal. 4. It is contended that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Export Company (2018) 404 ITR 654 (SC). 5. The ld.DR was unable controvert to this contentions of the ld.counsel for the assessee. 6. On due consideration of the above facts, we are of the view that the issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was whether the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2010 in section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is retrospective in nature and apply to the presen…

Agrawal Khurana Joint Venture, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 247/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

For Respondent: Sonia Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 40

Associated Law Advisers, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 1122/Del/2017 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2013 – 14 is allowed

ITA 1122/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiassociated Law Advisers, Vs. Acit, Antriksh Bhawan, 6Th Floor, 22, Circle-63(1), Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaafa8774F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 145(1)Section 154Section 244ASection 40Section 43Section 43B

…not been paid by the assessee even while following the cash system of accounting. Further the action of the learned CIT – A in invoking the provisions of section 40 (a) (i) is also devoid of any merit in view of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in 404 ITR 654 where the assessee has paid the above tax deduction at source to the credit of the government within the prescribed time. Accordingly the appeal of the assessee on the solitary issue of the disallowance of sum of INR 2 49381/– is allowed. 8. In the result ITA number 1122/Del/2017 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2013 – 14 is allowed. Ord…

Madhuri Suresh Rungta, Mumbai vs. ACIT - Circle- 26(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3746/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya AnjariaFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Vijani

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3746/Mum./2018 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Madhuri Suresh Rungta K.P. Associate, 222–8 Godika House, Sion (East) ……………. Appellant Mumbai 400 022 PAN – AACPR4294F v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–26(2), Mumbai Revenue by : Shri Ketan Vijani Assessee by : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria Date of Hearing – 18.04.2019 Date of Order – 30.04.2019 O R D E R The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order dated 29th January 2018, passed by the learned Commissioner…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1351/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Amount of Proposed international

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1351/DEL/2018 (A.Y 2009-10) M/s Hero Moto Corp Ltd. Vs DCIT 34, Basant Lok, Circle-11(1) Vasant Vihar C. R. Building New Delhi – 110 034. New Delhi. PAN : AAACH0812J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assesssee by Sh. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate and Sh. Gaurav Jain, Ms. Deepika Agarwal, Adv Respondent by Sh. Sanjay. I. Bara, CIT-DR & Sh. B. Ramanjaneyula, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 23.04.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM…

M/S.Vijaya Palace, Kollam vs. The ITO, Kollam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 506/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 194ASection 40

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., JM I.T.A. No. 506/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s. The Vijaya Palace, Vs. The Income-tax Officer, Ward-5, House No.CPXII/83877C, Alappuzha. Thattassery, Chavara, Kollam-691 583. [PAN:AADFT 7970K] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 21/03/2019 Date of pronouncement 03/04/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the…

M/S. Lg Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Gautam Buidh Nagar vs. ACIT, Noida

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

ITA 953/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10] Lg L.G Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The A.C.I.T Vs. No.51, Udyog Vihar, Circle -3 Plot Surajpur Kasna Road Noida Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Pan No. Aaacl 1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 144C

…the proviso which supplies obvious omission therein in required to be read retrospectively in operation particularly to give effect to section as a whole. 101. Same view was followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kolkata Export Company 404 ITR 654. 102. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court [supra] we direct the Assessing Officer to allow claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act as claimed by the assessee.” 48. Ground Nos. 13 and 14 relate to charging of interest u/s 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 49. Levy of interest is mandatory, though consequential…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Simtools P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the grounds

ITA 4825/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwaldcit, Cc-7(3) M/S Simtools Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 655, 6Th Floor, 216, Shah & Nahar Industrial Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Off. Dr. E. Moses Road, Mumbai-400018. Worli, Mumbai-400018. Vs. Pan: Aaecs1757M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (Dr) Respondent By : Shri Madhur Agarwal (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Chaudhary Arun KumarFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal (AR)

Section 153ASection 154Section 201Section 253Section 254(1)Section 40Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT, CC-7(3) M/s Simtools Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 655, 6th Floor, 216, Shah and Nahar Industrial Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Off. Dr. E. Moses Road, Mumbai-400018. Worli, Mumbai-400018. Vs. PAN: AAECS1757M Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (DR) Respondent by : Shri Madhur Agarwal (AR) Date of Hearing : 30.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 30.01.2019 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1.…

Ashok Mistry, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 32(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 6749/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ashok Mistry B-101, Acit Cir 32(1), C-11, Blossom Chs Ltd., I.C. 3Rdfloor, Pratyakshkar Vs. Colony Borivali (W), Bhavan Bkc Bandra Mumbai-400103 (E) Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aacpm0283B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sashank Dundu, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Satish Chandra Rajore, Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2019

For Appellant: Mr. Sashank Dundu, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Satish Chandra Rajore, DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 40

…nt by Finance Act, 2010, to provisions of section 40(a)(ia) is curative in nature and it should be given retrospective operation from date of insertion of said provision, as also upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Calcutta Export Company [2018] 404 ITR 654 (SC). Hence the addition may be deleted. 3. In a nutshell, the facts are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year (AY) 2007-08 on 12.10.2007 declaring total income of Rs.35,97,400/-. In the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that labour charges payment of Rs.97,06,307/- was made on which tax…

Lg Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT, Noida

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

ITA 6253/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2008-09] L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd Vs. The Asstt. C.I.T A-27, Mohan Co-Operative Industrial Circle - 3 Estate, Mathura Road Noida [U.P] New Delhi Pan : Aaacl 1745 Q [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.01.2019

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 80J

…the proviso which supplies obvious omission therein in required to be read retrospectively in operation particularly to give effect to section as a whole. 101. Same view was followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kolkata Export Company 404 ITR 654. 102. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court [supra] we direct the Assessing Officer to allow claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 103. Ground Nos. 13 & 13.1 pertain to levying of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 104. Levy of penalty is mandatory though consequential to our…

Deepak Rajaram Patil, Kolhapur vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Kolhapur

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

ITA 1040/PUN/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri P.S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali

Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 263Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “एक-सद"य मामला” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1040/PUN/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year : 2006-07 Deepak Rajaram Patil, Plot No. 58, A Ward, Savitri Bunglow, Shalini Palace Area, Kolhapur PAN : ABDPP2232R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम/ V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1(2), Kolhapur ……""यथ"/ Respondent Assessee by : Shri P.S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Gawali सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 07-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/ Date of Pronouncement : 09…