CIT v. Chawla Trunk House

AMAZON SMART COMMERCE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, DELHI

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

…) CIT, Mysore v. T. Narayana Pai : 98 ITR 422 (Kar) J.P.Srivastava And Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. v. CIT, UP: 111 ITR 326 (All) S.B.Sankar v. State of Kerala and Another: 171 ITR 689 (All) CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills: 178 ITR 446 (P&H) CIT, Patiala v. Chawla Trunk House: 139 ITR 182 (P&H) 158 In the facts of the present case, the Pr. CIT, in respect of all the issues, have merely held that further enquiry and examination is required, without even recording as to how the assessment order sought to be revised is erroneous on such issues; no error whatsoever has been pointed out regarding the said claims made by the appellant a…

VENETIAN LDF PROJECTS LLP,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

…ysore v. T. Narayana Pai : 98 ITR 422 (Kar)  J.P.Srivastava And Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. v. CIT, UP: 111 ITR 326 (All)  S.B.Sankar v. State of Kerala and Another: 171 ITR 689 (All)  CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills: 178 ITR 446 (P&H)  CIT, Patiala v. Chawla Trunk House: 139 ITR 182 (P&H) 158 In the facts of the present case, the Pr. CIT, in respect of all the issues, have merely held that further enquiry and examination is required, without even recording as to how the assessment order sought to be revised is erroneous on such issues; no error whatsoever has been pointed out regarding the said claims made by the appellant a…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SALORA INTERNATIONAL LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

…ld allege that the assessment order was cryptic. The same could not be made the basis for holding that order to be erroneous. Reliance in this respect was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chawla Trunk House, 139 ITR 182 (P&H). 2. In the light of the above facts, the Court is of the opinion that the question of law does not arise. In any event, the permissibility or otherwise of exercise of power under Section 263, in the said circumstances, is largely fact dependent and, in any case, the question is left open if any additions were made during the concerned year.…