CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd.

176 ITR 331High Court1989#8262 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 57(iii)dividend distribution tax section 10(34)section 57 long term capital gains disallowance u/s 14a long term capital gain section 14a section 10 income from other sources appeal before the tribunal previous year

Judgments citing CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd.

M/S MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 881/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…the order of respondent No. 1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State (see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. At least 48 hours cl…

M/S. HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2243/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Biju, M.K., CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80GSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.2243/Bang/2019 Assessment year : 2015-16 Harman Connected Services Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, No.3 & 3/A, EOIZ Industrial Circle 3(1)(2), Area, Survey No.85 & 86, Bengaluru. Sadarmangala Village, Krishnarajapuram Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 066. PAN: AABCG 5658E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent by : Shri. Biju, M.K., CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 07.09.2022…

M/S. ATRIA CONVERGENCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 1, BANGALORE

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

ITA 2475/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Aliasger Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Roumuan Paite, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 194JSection 40

APOLLO INTERNATIONAL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6088/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Sushma Chowla & Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo International Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 303, Dlf Court Yard, Circle-3(1), Saket, New Delhi. New Delhi Pan: Aaaca6447N Assessee By : Shri Manu K. Giri, Advocate Deptt. By : Shri Sanjog Kapoor, Sr. Dr (Appellants) (Respondents) Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St August, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-1, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Only Effective Ground Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:- “1. The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Disallowing An Amount Of Rs.37,32,000/- Under Section 14A Of The Act Read With Rule 8D Of The Income- Tax.” 3. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Export Of Tyres, Tubes, Flaps, Leather Garments & Leather Accessories, Etc. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.11.2013 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.9,47,07,931/-. The Ao In The Order Passed U/S 143(3) Made Disallowance Of Rs.37,32,000/- On The Ground That The Assessee Has Suo Motu Disallowed A Sum Of Rs.8,17,000/- Only As Against The Disallowance As Per Section 14A Of The Act R.W. Rule 8D Of The Income-Tax Rules, 1962 Which Comes To Rs.45,49,000/-.

For Appellant: Shri Manu K. Giri, Advocate

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 57

…the order of respondent No. 1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the Nigh Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Col) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. At least 48 hours cl…

APOLLO INTERNATIONAL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6118/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Manu Kr. Giri, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mithun Sethi, Sr.D.R

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 57

…the order of respondent No. 1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the Nigh Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Col) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being 5 I.T.A. No.6118/DEL/2016…

APOLLO INTERNATIONAL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 9/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Apollo International Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Office No. 303, 3Rd Floor, Dlf Circle-3(1), C.R. Building, Courtyard, Saket, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaaca6447N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Manu K. Giri, Adv. Respondent By Shri Sanjay I. Bara, Cit(Dr)

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92CSection 92C(2)

…the order of respondent No. 1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the Nigh Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Col) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. At least 48 hours cl…

M/S BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 530/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. B. R. Sudheendra, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the order of respondent No.1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order ITA Nos.528 to 530/Bang/2018 Page 20 of 22 must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opp…

BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(2), , BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 529/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. B. R. Sudheendra, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the order of respondent No.1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order ITA Nos.528 to 530/Bang/2018 Page 20 of 22 must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opp…

BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 528/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. B. R. Sudheendra, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the order of respondent No.1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order ITA Nos.528 to 530/Bang/2018 Page 20 of 22 must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opp…

KARE ELECTRONICS & DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10 is partly allowed

ITA 799/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Kare Electronics & Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Development Private Limited, Income Tax, Flat No.101, 1St Floor, Eden Park, Circle – 11(5), No.20, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan: Aabck 7679 R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Vikas K. Suryawamshi, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…the order of respondent No.1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. At least 48 hours' c…

M/S PRANAVA ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(1)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2526/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Pranava Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Flat No. 101, 1St Floor, Eden Park, Ward – 5(1)(3), No.20, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aadcp 2196 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Girija, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Vikas K. Suryawamshi, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 19.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2019

For Appellant: Smt. Girija, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Vikas K. Suryawamshi, Addl. CIT

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the order of respondent No.1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. At least 48 hours' c…

J V HOLDINGS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1337/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. J. V. Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 1St Floor, Embassy Point, Income-Tax, 150 Infantry Road, Circle – 4[1][1], Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. Pan : Aabcj 9763 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Seetharam, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Nandhini Das, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2018

For Appellant: Shri. Seetharam, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Nandhini Das, Addl. CIT

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the order of respondent No.1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. At least 48 hours' c…

ASST CIT CIR 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ASK INVESTMENT MANAGERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 534/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2012-13 Acit M/S Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5Th Floor, 1St Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistri Sr. Advocate

Section 115JSection 14A

…the order of respondent No.1 cannot be sustained on the simple ground that respondent No. 1 is an authority operating within the State of West Bengal and is bound by the decisions of the High Court of this State ( see CIT v. Indian Press Exchange Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 331 (Cal) ; East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1993, paragraph 29). ITA. No.534/Mum/2017 56 M/s Ask Investment Managers Pvt. Ltd. In that view of the matter, the impugned order must be set aside and the Commissioner is directed to consider the matter afresh in keeping with the decisions of this court after giving the…