CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd.

123 ITR 200High Court1980#3195 most cited

What is CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

The subject matter of an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is to be broadly construed, and the scope of such appeals extends to issues arising from the assessment order that are presented through the grounds of appeal.

37

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd. · 123 ITR 200 · Commissioner (Appeals) · scope of appeal · subject matter of appeal · Section 251(1)(a) · assessment order · grounds of appeal

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)escapement of incomecross objectioncommissioner (appeals)long term capital gainsection 14asection 25section 147appeal before the tribunalsection 15section 13section 143

Judgments citing CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd.

EDELWEISS ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3020/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule , Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 154Section 25tSection 270ASection 37(1)

…as been dealt with in the body of the order of the assessment, a arose for his consideration as per the grounds of appeal raised before him, being the subj matter of appeal. 15. This is succinctly stated in CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) (P.) Ltd. [1980] 123 ITR 200 (Delhi) 16. The only question is as to whether the CIT(A), in exercise of power under Section 251(1)(a) the Act has the power to enhance the assessment in the manner done in the instant case. noted above, the submission of learned counsel for the appellant was that the Assessing Office had not dealt with the issue in question (on which additions…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. SHRI GAUTAM BHALLA

ITA/47/2020HC Delhi07 Nov 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…led for with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. In support of his plea, Mr Aggarwal sought to place reliance on the following judgments: (i) Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi (Central) vs. Edward Keventer (Successors) P. Ltd. [1980] 123 ITR 200. (ii) Alcatel Lucent France vs. ADIT [2016] 69 taxmann.com 379 (Delhi). 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. The facts set forth hereinabove are not in dispute. The only issue that the Tribunal has dealt with and based on which the reassessment order was quashed, concerns the applicability of th…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. SHRI GAUTAM BHALLA

ITA/46/2020HC Delhi07 Nov 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…led for with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. In support of his plea, Mr Aggarwal sought to place reliance on the following judgments: (i) Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi (Central) vs. Edward Keventer (Successors) P. Ltd. [1980] 123 ITR 200. (ii) Alcatel Lucent France vs. ADIT [2016] 69 taxmann.com 379 (Delhi). 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. The facts set forth hereinabove are not in dispute. The only issue that the Tribunal has dealt with and based on which the reassessment order was quashed, concerns the applicability of th…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), THRISSUR vs. SRI.K.P. JOHNY, THRISSUR

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dask.P. Johny Asst. Cit, Manappuram House Circle – 2(1) Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Thrissur 680307 Sakthan Thampuran Nagar [Pan:Acgpj4958G] Thrissur 680001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit, K.P. Johny Circle – 2(1) Manappuram House Aayakar Bhavan Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Vs. Sakthan Thampuran Nagar Thrissur 680307 Thrissur 680001 [Pan: Acgpj4958G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Sreedharan, Sr. Advocate (with Smt. Divya Ravindran, Adv. with him)For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)Section 133ASection 147Section 148(1)Section 69

…with the justice of the case (CIT vs. Walchand & Co. Pvt. Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381). The subject matter of appeal, again, there is no gainsaying, flowing from the ratio afore-stated, is to broadly construed (CIT vs. Edward Keventer (Successor) Pvt. Ltd. [1980] 123 ITR 200 (Del))(refer para 2 of the order). There is no estoppel against law, and the proceedings under the Act are not in the nature of lis between the parties nor an assessment there-under a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute (Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal &Co. [1964] 53 ITR 231 (SC)). It is, it is to be appreciated, the correct legal position that is rele…

SRI.K.P. JOHNY,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), THRISSUR

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 206/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dask.P. Johny Asst. Cit, Manappuram House Circle – 2(1) Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Thrissur 680307 Sakthan Thampuran Nagar [Pan:Acgpj4958G] Thrissur 680001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit, K.P. Johny Circle – 2(1) Manappuram House Aayakar Bhavan Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Vs. Sakthan Thampuran Nagar Thrissur 680307 Thrissur 680001 [Pan: Acgpj4958G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Sreedharan, Sr. Advocate (with Smt. Divya Ravindran, Adv. with him)For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)Section 133ASection 147Section 148(1)Section 69

…with the justice of the case (CIT vs. Walchand & Co. Pvt. Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381). The subject matter of appeal, again, there is no gainsaying, flowing from the ratio afore-stated, is to broadly construed (CIT vs. Edward Keventer (Successor) Pvt. Ltd. [1980] 123 ITR 200 (Del))(refer para 2 of the order). There is no estoppel against law, and the proceedings under the Act are not in the nature of lis between the parties nor an assessment there-under a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute (Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal &Co. [1964] 53 ITR 231 (SC)). It is, it is to be appreciated, the correct legal position that is rele…

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SATYA SECURITIES LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the petition under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963, as filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2008–09, is allowed

ITA 6673/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal a/wFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Mane a/w
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…l the decision on issues, which are beyond the subject matter of the appeal. In support of the submissions, reliance has been placed upon CIT v. Divine Infra (P.) Ltd. [2015] 64 taxmann.com 472 (Delhi) and CIT v. Edward Keventor (Successors) (P.) Ltd . [1980] 123 ITR 200 (Delhi). 10. Before proceeding further, it is relevant to note the provisions of Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963, which reads as under: “Respondent may support order on grounds decided against him. 27. The respondent, though he may not have appealed, may support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him.” 11. The interpr…

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SATYA SECURITIES LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the petition under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963, as filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2008–09, is allowed

ITA 6669/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal a/wFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Mane a/w
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…l the decision on issues, which are beyond the subject matter of the appeal. In support of the submissions, reliance has been placed upon CIT v. Divine Infra (P.) Ltd. [2015] 64 taxmann.com 472 (Delhi) and CIT v. Edward Keventor (Successors) (P.) Ltd . [1980] 123 ITR 200 (Delhi). 10. Before proceeding further, it is relevant to note the provisions of Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963, which reads as under: “Respondent may support order on grounds decided against him. 27. The respondent, though he may not have appealed, may support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him.” 11. The interpr…

CHIRANJEEV KUMAR VINAYAK,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-47(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6644/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292BSection 68Section 69C

…Ltd. (2013) 258 (Bom.) (iii) DCIT v. Sandip m. Patel (2012) 137 ITD 104 (Ahmedabad) (iv) CIT v. Jindal polyster Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 282 (All.) (v) Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P) Ltd. (19780 111 ITR 1 (SC) (vi) CIT v. EdwerKeventer (Successors0 P. ltd. (1980) 123 ITR 200 (Delhi) (vii) Ultratech Cement ltd. v. Addl. CiT, Range-2(2) (2017) 298 CTR 437 (Bom) (viii) Self Knitting Works v. CiT (2014) 227 taxman 253 (P&H) The ld. DR relying on the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, submitted that as per the settled position of law, the objection raised by the Id. A.R during the course of hearing of the appeal as regard…

GEORGE KUTTY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3788/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] George Kutty, Vs Dcit, C/O-M/S. Oasis Tours India (P.) Circle-13(1), Ltd., C-40, Middle Circle, Dwarka New Delhi. Sadan, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aajpk4005H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Manish Malik, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 276CSection 68

…(2013) 458 (Bom.) (iii) DCIT v. Sandip M. Patel (2012) 137 ITD 104 (Ahmedabad) (iv) CIT v. Jindal Ployster Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 282 (All.) (v) Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd. (1978) 111 ITR 1 (SC) (vi) CIT v. EdwertKeventer (Successors) P. Ltd. (1980) 123 ITR 200 (Dr (vii) Ultratech Cement Ltd. v. AddI. CIT, Range-2(2) (2017) 298 CTR 43' (viii) Self Knitting Works v. CIT (2014) 227 taxman 253 (P & H) The Id. D.R relying on the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, submitted that as per the settled position of law, the objection raised by the Id. A.R during the course of hearing of the appeal as regards the…

AVALON BUSINESS ASSOCIATES,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-41(5), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1859/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 10Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80

…ew that ITAT was in error in declining to examine the cross objections filed by the Appellant Assessee. The powers of the ITAT while hearing appeals and cross objections have been explained by this Court in CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd. (1980) 123 ITR 200 in the following words: “Now, adverting to the rights of the respondent in an appeal, we start with the basic idea that, if a party appeals, he is the party who comes before the Appellate Tribunal to redress a grievance alleged by him. If the other side has a grievance, he has a right to file a cross-appeal (and under the Civil Procedure Code an…

THE UNITED PROVINCES SUGAR COMPANY LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2021AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’ble Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd............................................………………….............Appellant 1st Floor, Chartered Bank Building 4, Netaji Subhash Road Kolkata – 700 001 [PAN : AAACT 4947 L] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(2), Kolkata.....................……………...................………..…......Respondent Appearances by: Shri S.M. Surana Advocate & Shri P.K. Sanghai, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee.…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. M/S SHIV VEGPRO PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 739/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jul 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…tled to it, if he does not ask for it in the appeal. The powers of the Tribunal though are very wide but only within the subject matter of appeal. He has also relied upon the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd., 123 ITR 200 (Del.) and submitted the Hon’ble High Court has again reiterated that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is only 7 M/s. Shiv Vegpro Pvt. Ltd., Kota. in respect of the subject matter of the appeal and not beyond. Thus he has objected to the plea raised by the assessee under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules on the ground that the Tribunal has no jurisdic…

SANJAY SAWHNEY vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

ITA/834/2019HC Delhi18 May 2020
Section 132Section 142(1)(ii)Section 153CSection 253(2)Section 260A

…il the decision on issues which are beyond the subject matter of appeal. In support of his submissions, Mr. Hossain relied upon the decisions in CIT vs. Divine Infracon Pvt. Ltd. 2015 SCC OnLine Del 10952; CIT vs. Edward Keventor Successive Pvt. Ltd. 1980 123 ITR 200 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia 2013 352 ITR 493 (Delhi). 9. In rejoinder, Mr. Krishnan while reiterating his submissions, distinguished and clarified the import of the judgments relied upon by Revenue and in particular, the decisions in the case of CIT vs. Divine Infra Pvt. Ltd (supra)and CIT vs. Edward Keventor Successive Pvt. Ltd…

ACIT, NOIDA vs. SH. GEETAMBER ANAND, NOIDA

In the result ITA number 2216/del/2014 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2006 – 07 is dismissed

ITA 5982/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ved jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra CIT
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…f the objection may be such that it is only a defense to the appeal itself but was further and may affect the validity of the entire proceedings miserably. He supported the above argument by placing reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in 123 ITR 200. Even otherwise on merits he relied upon the order of the learned CIT – A. 19. The learned departmental representative vehemently objected to the argument of the learned authorised representative and stated that as the assessee has not filed an appeal, he cannot raise this additional ground by invoking the provisions of rule 27 of The Income Tax…

MR. GETAMBER ANAND,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, MEERUT

In the result ITA number 2216/del/2014 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2006 – 07 is dismissed

ITA 5696/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ved jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra CIT
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…f the objection may be such that it is only a defense to the appeal itself but was further and may affect the validity of the entire proceedings miserably. He supported the above argument by placing reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in 123 ITR 200. Even otherwise on merits he relied upon the order of the learned CIT – A. 19. The learned departmental representative vehemently objected to the argument of the learned authorised representative and stated that as the assessee has not filed an appeal, he cannot raise this additional ground by invoking the provisions of rule 27 of The Income Tax…

DCIT, MEERUT vs. SH. GEETAMBER ANAND, NOIDA

In the result ITA number 2216/del/2014 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2006 – 07 is dismissed

ITA 2216/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ved jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra CIT
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…f the objection may be such that it is only a defense to the appeal itself but was further and may affect the validity of the entire proceedings miserably. He supported the above argument by placing reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in 123 ITR 200. Even otherwise on merits he relied upon the order of the learned CIT – A. 19. The learned departmental representative vehemently objected to the argument of the learned authorised representative and stated that as the assessee has not filed an appeal, he cannot raise this additional ground by invoking the provisions of rule 27 of The Income Tax…

HARISH KUMAR HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-34(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1469/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Dr. B.R.R. Kumara.Y. : 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Naveen ND Gupta, CA & Sh. AshuFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 288ASection 94(7)

…d. (2013) 458 (Bom.) (iii) DCIT v. Sandip M. Patel (2012) 137 ITD 104 (Ahmedabad) (iv) CIT v. Jindal Ployster Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 282 (All.) (v) Add/. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd. (1978) 111 ITR 1 (SC) (VI) CIT v. EdwertKeventer (Successors) P. Ltd. (1980) 123 ITR 200 (Delhi) (vii) Ultra tech Cement Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, Range-2(2) (2017) 298 CTR 437 (Bom.) (viii) Self Knitting Works v. CIT (2014) 227 taxman 253 (P & H) The Id. D.R relying on the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, submitted that as per the settled position of law, the objection raised by the Id. A.R during the course of hearing of the appeal as r…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI CHARANJIT SINGH SARNA, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3944/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132ASection 153ASection 41(1)Section 68

…of Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, the assessee is entitled to defend the order of the CIT(A) on the issued decided against the assessee. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) 123 ITR 200 (Delhi), where the Hon’ble Court has decided the issue of the rights of the respondent in the appeal. The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of ITO v. IME International P. Ltd. in ITA No. 1873/Del/2012 dated 08.01.2016. The Ld. AR also relied upon the following judgments: • CIT v. Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Br…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI CHARANJIT SINGH SARNA, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3943/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132ASection 153ASection 41(1)Section 68

…of Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, the assessee is entitled to defend the order of the CIT(A) on the issued decided against the assessee. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Edward Keventer (Successors) 123 ITR 200 (Delhi), where the Hon’ble Court has decided the issue of the rights of the respondent in the appeal. The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of ITO v. IME International P. Ltd. in ITA No. 1873/Del/2012 dated 08.01.2016. The Ld. AR also relied upon the following judgments: • CIT v. Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Br…

YORK SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 27(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 6030/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

Section 133Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .No.-6030/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-07) York Scientific Industries P. Ltd. vs ITO C/o Vinod Arora, 14, Chitra Vihar Ward 27(4), Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAACY1002H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Shri Suresh Anand, FCA Respondent by Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR ORDER This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 04.06.2018 of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-9, New Delhi relevant to assessment year 2006-07 on the following grounds of appeal: - 1. “That on facts and circumstan…

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2