CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd.

347 ITR 458High Court2012#6079 most cited

What is CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. authority for?

Unabsorbed depreciation can be set off against income from other sources, even if the business is no longer carried on. The omission of a proviso regarding the continuance of the same business dispensed with this requirement.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. · brought forward depreciation · set off · income from other sources · unabsorbed depreciation · section 32(2) · business income · other heads of income

Also reported as

30 Taxmann.com 83

Issues it is cited on

section 32(2)section 32income from other sourcescompanyindiabusinessdocumentinterest

Judgments citing CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd.

J B ADVANI AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2544/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalej.B Advani & Company Vs. Acit, Circle 2(2)(1), Pvt Ltd.,Ador House, 4Th Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, 6 K, Dubashmarg, Mumbai-400021. Kalghoda,Liongate,Fort, Mumbai-400001. Pan/Gir No. : Aaacj1966D Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Paras Savla & Shri PratikFor Respondent: Shri.G.J.Ninawe.Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234DSection 244ASection 32Section 32(2)Section 70Section 71(2)

…[1995] 83 Taxman 343 (SC). 4. General Motors India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, [2012] 25 taxmann.com 364 (Gujarat) J.B Advani & Company Pvt Ltd, Mumbai. 5. CIT vKisan Engineering Works Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 328 (Allahabad). 6. CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd.[2012] 347 ITR 458 (Punjab & Haryana) 7. Suresh Industries (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2012] 27 taxmann.com 203 (Mum). 8. DCIT v. J.BEnggWorks [2017] 82 taxmann.com 326 (Mumbai - Trib). 9. Sunshield Chemicals (P.) Vs. ITO [2015] 64 taxmann.com 161 (Mumbai - Trib). 10 Pfizer Ltd v. CIT [1991]191 ITR 626 (Bombay) 11. Tata Communications Payment Solutions Ltd v. DCIT ITA No.…

ACIT CENT. CIR-7(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TRIUMPH INTERNATIONAL FINANCE INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed

ITA 2283/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 2282/मुं/ 2021 ("न.व. 2014-15) आअसं. 2283/मुं/ 2021 ("न.व. 2017-18)

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, Special CounselFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal

…t in dispute. The point of contention is whether the brought forward depreciation could be set off against ‘income from other sources’. The CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by following the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. GTM Synthetics Ltd. 347 ITR 458 (P&H). No contrary decision has been brought to our notice by the Revenue. In the light of above, no interference in the findings of CIT(A) are warranted. The ground No.3 of appeal by Revenue is dismissed, accordingly. 17. In the result, appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed. 18. To sum up, appeal by Revenue for assessment…

ACIT CC 7(1) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. TRUMPH INTERNATIONAL FINANCE INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed

ITA 2282/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 2282/मुं/ 2021 ("न.व. 2014-15) आअसं. 2283/मुं/ 2021 ("न.व. 2017-18)

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, Special CounselFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal

…t in dispute. The point of contention is whether the brought forward depreciation could be set off against ‘income from other sources’. The CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by following the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. GTM Synthetics Ltd. 347 ITR 458 (P&H). No contrary decision has been brought to our notice by the Revenue. In the light of above, no interference in the findings of CIT(A) are warranted. The ground No.3 of appeal by Revenue is dismissed, accordingly. 17. In the result, appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed. 18. To sum up, appeal by Revenue for assessment…

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 967/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 947/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1883/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,MADURAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1846/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1272/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1078/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1077/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1076/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1063/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1062/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1061/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1060/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1059/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25- 1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8-2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set-off against the income under any other head even where the…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LARGE TAXPAYERS UNITS),KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD

ITAT/8/2018HC Calcutta01 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260ASection 32Section 32(2)

…he Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in Pr. CIT v. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [SLP (C) Diary No. 48020 of 2018, dated 25-1-2019]. 12. In the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 30 taxmann.com 83/[2012] 347 ITR 458], an identical issue was considered in the following terms : '8. The effect of omission of the aforesaid proviso was enumerated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 794 dated 9-8- 2000 [(2000) 245 ITR (Statute)] 21 that the unabsorbed depreciation allowance could be set- off against the income under any other head even where th…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA - 4, KOLKATA vs. M/S JCT LIIMITED

ITAT/162/2017HC Calcutta25 Nov 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date: November 25, 2021. Appearance : Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Asim Choudhury, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St June, 2016 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Kolkata In Ita No.1983/Kol/2013 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Revenue Has Framed The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Our Consideration: “(A) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Tribunal Was Erred In Law In

Section 2Section 260ASection 263Section 32

…OD – 36 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE IA NO:GA/2/2017 (OLD NO. GA/1419/2017) IN ITAT/162/2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-4, KOLKATA VS. M/S. JCT LIMITED BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM A N D THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date: November 25, 2021. Appearance : Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Adv. … for the appellant Mr. Asim Choudhury, Adv. … for the respondent The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, in brevity) is directed against the order dated 1st June, 2016 passed by the…

ITO CORPORATE WARD 3(2), CHENNAI vs. TTG INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1934/CHNY/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate
Section 154Section 32

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1934/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Income Tax Officer, M/s. TTG Industries Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward-3(2), Vs. Old No.672, New No.476, Chennai. Temple Tower III Floor, Anna Salai, Nandanam (Mount Road), Chennai – 600 035. [PAN: AAACT 6106F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri G. John…

CIT v. G.T.M. Synthetics Ltd. (347 ITR 458) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax