How many judgments cite CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd.?

221 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. (376 ITR 456), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(1), Section 139(1), Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 80JJAA, Section 10B.

CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd.

376 ITR 456Supreme Court of India2015#404 most cited

What is CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. authority for?

The requirement to file a certificate or form (e.g., Form 10CCB, 10-IC) along with the return of income for claiming a deduction (e.g., under sections 80-IB, 115BAA) is directory regarding its timing. Such a deduction is allowable if the requisite form is filed before the final order of assessment, as procedural requirements should not override substantive benefits.

221

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries · 376 ITR 456 · G.M. Knitting · Section 80-IB · Section 115BAA · Section 80JJAA · Section 10B · Form 10CCB · filing forms for deduction · timing of claim · procedural vs substantive benefits · assessment procedure · Supreme Court

Also reported as

71 Taxmann.com 35

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250 Section 80JJAA Section 10B Section 119(2)(b)Section 154

Issues it is cited on

section 80j(6a)section 10b(8)section 80ia(7)section 80jjaa section 10ba section 80jja section 80j section 288 section 115baa section 10b section 80a(5)additional depreciation

Judgments citing CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd.

Oan Industries Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 4(2), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 584/JPR/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.584/Jpr/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2023-24 Oan Industries Private The Income Tax Limited, V Officer, 134, Malhotra Nagar, Near S Ward-4(2), Jaipur. Vidyadhar Nagar Stadium, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302039. Pan: Aacco9587F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Mukesh Khandelwal – Ca Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena- Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 04/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Addl.Commissioner Of Income Tax/Jcit(Appeals)-2, Pune U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; For A.Y.2023-24 Dated Oan Industries Private Limited [A]

Section 115JSection 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 4Section 44ASection 5Section 7Section 80

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”ए” "ायपीठ जयपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCHES “A” :: JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.584/JPR/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2023-24 OAN Industries Private The Income Tax Limited, V Officer, 134, Malhotra Nagar, Near s Ward-4(2), Jaipur. Vidyadhar Nagar Stadium, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302039. PAN: AACCO9587F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Mukesh Khandelwal – CA Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena- Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 04/07/2024…

Da Toll Road Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 15(1)(2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 626/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Jm) & Shri Girish Agrawal (Am)

Section 115JSection 119(2)(b)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250Section 44ASection 80I

…ndicates that assessee’s revised return dated 19.9.2018 raising 80IA deduction claim of Rs. 8,17,82,789/- had been filed alongwith Form 10CCB, and it was indeed entitled for the impugned relief in the light of CIT Vs. G.M. Knitting Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 376 ITR 456 (SC), dealing with section 80IB deduction claims. We make it clear that section 80IB(13) also imports section 80IA(7) “so far as may be”. We accordingly conclude that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in disallowing the assessee’s impugned section 80IA deduction of Rs. 8,17,82,789/-in section 143(1)(a)(ii) processi…

Je Energy Ventures Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1)(1), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 513/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 92B

…in an anti avoidance measure introduced by the legislature. Hon'ble apex court's recent landmark decisions PCIT V/s Wipro Ltd. (2022) 140 taxmann.com 223, Commissioner V/s Dilip Kumar & Co 2018 (9) SCC 1(SC) FB & CIT V/s GM Knitting Industries (P) Ltd (2015) 376 ITR 456 (SC) have settled the law that the relevant provisions in the Act ought to be put to stricter interpretation only. J E Energy Ventures Private Limited vs. DCIT Thus if the TP provisions / legislature provides for statutory charging of CG commission for the CG provided on behalf of the AE's, then in line with the provision as content in the Act,…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Astrotech Steels Private Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed in terms of our above order

ITA 1150/CHNY/2023[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1150/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit M/S Astrotech Steels Private Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1) 19, Ii Floor, Right Wing, Ghatala Towers, Chennai. Avenue Road, Nungambakkam Vs. Chennai-34. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakca-0128-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)- Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) -Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 27-06-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)- Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) -Ld. AR

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 154

…forward of loss. It was also submitted that there was no claim for any deduction u/s 10B(1) at any time. The assessee also referred to various case laws including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. (376 ITR 456) and submitted that the principle laid down therein would apply to the interpretation of Sec.10B(8) also. The provisions of Sec.10B(8) enables an assessee to exclude the applicability of the deduction u/s 10B by filing a declaration to that effect before the last date in which the return of income is required to be filed. It was further submitted…

ITO(E), Vadodara, Race Ciurse Vadodara vs. Takshshila Foundation(Ngo), Karelibaugh, Vadodara

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 118/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Jul 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member & Co No.8/Ahd/2024 (In Ita No.118/Ahd/2024 – By Assessee) Assessment Year : 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer (E) Takshshila Foundation (Ngo) (Ward) Vs B/15, Suhas Society Race Course Harni Road Vadodara 390 007 Karelibaug, Vadodara – 390 018 (Gujarat) Pan:Aaatt 5363 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent & Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri D.K. Parikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Arises From The Order Of The Office Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit (A)–6, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 08-12-2023, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23 Against The Intimation/Order Passed U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) By Cpc, Bengaluru & The Assessee Is In Cross Objection Thereof.

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

…Processing Mills v. CIT [1996] 219 ITR 721 (Guj.); VII. CIT v. Mayur Foundation [2005] 274 ITR 562 (Guj.); VIII. CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries [1993] 201 ITR 325 (Guj.); IX. CIT v. G. M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. [2016] 71 taxmann.com 35/[2015] 376 ITR 456 (SC); X. CIT v. Web Commerce (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 310/318 ITR 135 (Delhi); XI. CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 422/317 ITR 249 (Delhi); XII. Pr. CIT v. Surya Merchants Ltd. [2016] 72 taxmann.com 16/387 ITR 105 (All.); XIII. DIC Fine Chemicals (P.)Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2019] 107 taxmann.com 213/177 ITD 672 (Kol…

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…

Ramakrishna Rao, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Alipurduar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 541/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

…ry requirement and is not a mandatory requirement and violation of procedural norm does not extinguish the substantive right of claiming the credit of FTC. The following decisions support the claim of the assessee: i. CIT vs. G.M. Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. 71 Taxmann.com 35(SC) ii. Brinda Ramakrishna vs. ITO 193 ITD 840 (Bang.) iii. 42 Hertz Software India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT, Ita No.29/Bang/2021 8 Ramakrishna Rao Chintalapudi, AY: 2020-21. iv. Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy vs. PCIT, W.P No.5834 of 2022 13. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner, (19…

Aprameya Engineering Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Ward 1(1)(1), Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad

In the result, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside, and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 456/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year: 2022-23 Aprameya Engineering Limited The Income Tax Officer 908, 9Th Floor, Vs Ward-1(1)(1) Venus Atlantis Ahmedabad Corporate Park Anandnagar, Prahlad Nagar Ahmedabad – 380 015 (Gujarat) Pan: Aawca 3138 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Add/Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5 Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred As “The Cit(A)”), Dated 23-02-2024, Which Dismissed The Assessee'S Appeal Against The Intimation Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As “The Act”), Passed By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23. The Primary Issue Is The Rejection Of The Assessee'S Claim For Taxation At A Lower Rate Under Section Aprameya Engineering Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)

…tion, the procedural requirements should not override substantive benefits. The Courts have taken a lenient view on procedural lapses when substantive benefits are involved. SC ruling in the case of CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. reported in (2015) 376 ITR 456 emphasized that the making of a claim of deduction is mandatory, but timing is directory. Even if the claim is made during the assessment proceedings, such a claim is to be allowed. 8.3. After considering the submissions, the judicial precedents cited and the specific facts of the case, we are of the opinion the delay in filing Form 10-IC, thoug…

Panacea Boitec Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addi. CIT National Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 807/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year: 2016-17 Panacea Boitec Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, G-3/B-1 Extension, National Assessment Mohan Coop. Indl Centre, Estate, Mathura Road New Delhi. New Delhi – 110044 Pan Aaacp5335J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 6Section 6(1)Section 92BSection 92C

…Act, 2017 which is applicable with effect from 01.04.2017. Hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decisions PCIT V/s Wipro Ltd. (2022) 140 taxmann.com 223, Commissioner V/s Dilip Kumar & Co. 2018 (9) SCC 1(SC) FB & CIT V/s GM Knitting Industries (P) Ltd.(2015) 376 ITR 456 (SC) have settled the law that the relevant provisions in the Act ought to be put to stricter interpretation only. Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Fiber Boards Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT Bangalore in 62 taxmann.com 135/376 ITR 596(SC). Hon'ble Supreme Court, after duly considering all the decisions, came to a conclusion that the ratio of the…

Akuntha Projects Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Director, CPC, Bengaluru, Jurisdictional AO- the ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 52/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 May 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.52/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Akuntha Projects Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Deputy Director-CPC, 25, Chitrakut Twin Bunglows, Bengaluru Vastrapur, Ahmedabad, Present Jurisdiction Gujarat-380015 Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad [PAN No.AALCA4829P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Biren Shah, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02.05.2024 20.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICI…

Sukdev Sen, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir. 61, Kolkata

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

ITA 78/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 90Section 90(2)

…and violation of procedural norm does not extinguish the substantive right of claiming the credit of FTC. In support of the claim, the assessee has relied upon several decisions including the following decisions: i. CIT vs. G.M. Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. 71 Taxmann.com 35(SC) ii. Brinda Ramakrishna vs. ITO 193 ITD 840 (Bang.) iii. 42 Hertz Software India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT, Ita No.29/Bang/2021 iv. Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy vs. PCIT, W.P No.5834 of 2022 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner, (1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 21) in resepct…

Concentrix Daksh Services India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 485/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ankul Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…an anti avoidance measure introduced by the legislature. Hon'ble apex court's recent landmark decisions PCIT V/s Wipro Ltd. (2022) 140 taxmann.com 223, Commissioner V/s Dilip Kumar & Co. 2018 (9) SCC 1(SC) FB & CIT V/s. GM Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. (2015) 376 ITR 456 (SC) have settled the law that the relevant provisions in the Act ought to be put to stricter interpretation only. It is also informed that during the course of hearing the assessee has mentioned that it is mostly deriving receipts from related parties only and the position taken in the hearing is contradicted to the grounds of appeal and hence n…

Sh. Pawan Kumar, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 750/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Ahuja, Advocate and Shri Pawan Kumar, AssesseFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

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

…d the matter is thus decided in favour of the assessee.” Further, we find that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Duraiswamy 12. Kumaraswamy vs PCIT (supra), following the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in case of CIT vs G.M. Knitting Industries (P) Ltd 376 ITR 456, has upheld the aforesaid view and has held that filing of Form 67 for claiming foreign tax credit in terms of Rule 128 is only directory in nature as the rules are only for implementation of the provisions of the Act and will always be directory in nature. Further, in the facts of the relevant case before it, the Hon’ble High Court held that whe…

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 960/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

…e. an anti avoidance measure introduced by the legislature. Hon'ble apex court's recent landmark decisions PCIT V/s Wipro Ltd. (2022) 140 taxmann.com 223, Commissioner V/s Dilip Kumar & Co. 2018 (9)4CC 1(SC) FB & CIT V/s. GM Knitting Industries (P) Ltd.(2015) 376 ITR 456 (SC) have settled the law that the relevant provisions in the Act ought to be put to stricter interpretation only.” 9.2 Lastly, the ld. D.R. submitted that even at the cost of repetition, as discussed in detail in the above noted paras, it is once again reiterated that the interest on outstanding receivables has been duly computed by the TPO ba…

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 959/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 1306/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 1305/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

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

…of PCIT Vs M/s. Wipro Limited (supra). Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. We find that this issue is squarely covered in assessee’s favor by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. G.M. Knitting Industries P. Ltd. (71 Taxmann.com 35). The Hon’ble Court affirmed the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. AKS Alloys P. Ltd (18 Taxmann.com 25). In the decision of AKS Alloys P. Ltd., it was held by jurisdictional High Court as under: - 5. In so far as it relates to the substantial question of law (1) is concerned, namely, whether the filing of audit r…

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

…I.T.A.No.652/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.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. PAN No.AIQPK9454L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri Mayank Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 02.11.2023 30.01.2024 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal is filed by the Ass…

A R Industries, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 175/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraa. R. Industries Vs. Dcit Khasra No. 52/7, Plot No.6 Cpc Village, Pehaladpur, Bengaluru New Delhi -110 042 Pan No. Aaofa 2476 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Amit Goel, C.A. & Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv. Revenue By Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 22.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.01.2024

Section 143(1)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER A. R. Industries Vs. DCIT Khasra No. 52/7, Plot No.6 CPC Village, Pehaladpur, Bengaluru New Delhi -110 042 PAN No. AAOFA 2476 L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Amit Goel, C.A. and Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv. Revenue by Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 22.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 25.01.2024 PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 12, New Delhi (‘CIT(A)…