CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.

341 ITR 293High Court2012#443 most cited

What is CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. authority for?

A Commissioner can revise an assessment order under Section 263 if it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. This includes cases where the Assessing Officer fails to make further inquiries before accepting the assessee's statements in the return.

205

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. · Section 263 · lack of enquiry · erroneous and prejudicial to revenue · Commissioner revisionary power · Assessing Officer duty to inquire · revision of assessment order · 2012 Karnataka High Court

Also reported as

17 Taxmann.com 203237 CTR 141

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 143(3)Section 32Section 132Section 153ASection 142(1)Section 14ASection 37
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

csr expendituresection 135lack of enquirymalabar industrialapplication of incomedisallowance under section 14aerroneous and prejudicialcapital expendituresection 40(a)section 40(a)(ia)liable to taxdisallowance u/s 14a

Judgments citing CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.

M/S. Charoen Pokphand Seeds (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 311/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Charoen Pokphand Seeds India The Principal Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 1021/1, Service Income Tax, Road, Gitanjali Layout, Bengaluru – 2, Hal Iii Stage, Vs. Bengaluru. Bangalore – 560 075. Pan: Aaccc3259N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri C. Ramesh, Ca : Shri Bijoy Kumar Panda, Cit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 21-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of The Order U/S. 263 Dated 30.03.2021 Passed By The Ld.Pr.Cit, Bengaluru – 2, Bengaluru For Assessment Year 2016-17 On Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal: “The Appellant Objects To The Revision Order Passed U/S. 263 On The Following Grounds In So Far As It Is Prejudicial To The As It Is Opposed To Law & Circumstances Of The Case: - Originally The Appellant Has Taken Only One Ground Relating To Deduction U/S.35(2Ab). The Following Grounds Were Not Taken By Oversight. Hence The Appellant Is Filing Revised Grounds Of Appeal As Mentioned Below.

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CA
Section 10Section 10(1)Section 10ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Charoen Pokphand Seeds India The Principal Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner of No. 1021/1, Service Income Tax, Road, Gitanjali Layout, Bengaluru – 2, HAL III Stage, Vs. Bengaluru. Bangalore – 560 075. PAN: AACCC3259N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri C. Ramesh, CA : Shri Bijoy Kumar Panda, CIT Revenue by (DR) Date of Hearing : 21-04-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29-04-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal arises out of the…

Mysore Minerals Limited (Now Known As Karnataka State Minerals Corporation Limited), Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 465/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.464 to 465/Bang/2020 Assessment year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Mysore Minerals Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner [now Karnataka State Minerals of Income Tax, Corporation Ltd.], Circle 4[1][2], BMTC Shantinagar TTMC Building, Bengaluru. ‘A’ Block, 5th Floor, Shantinagar, Bengaluru – 560 027. PAN: AACCM 2873L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 03.03.2…

Mysore Minerals Limited (Now Known As Karnataka State Minerals Corporation Limited), Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 464/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.464 to 465/Bang/2020 Assessment year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Mysore Minerals Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner [now Karnataka State Minerals of Income Tax, Corporation Ltd.], Circle 4[1][2], BMTC Shantinagar TTMC Building, Bengaluru. ‘A’ Block, 5th Floor, Shantinagar, Bengaluru – 560 027. PAN: AACCM 2873L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 03.03.2…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S.Gmr Hyderabad International Airport Ltd., Bangalore

ITA 633/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Ms.Padmavathy S, AM ITA No.620/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 ITA No.633/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 ITA No.603/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 ITA No.604/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/s.GMR Hyderabad The Deputy Commissioner of International Airport Limited Income-tax, Central Circle 2(2) v. No.25/1 Skip House, Bangalore. Museum Road Bangalore – 560 025. PAN : AABCH3448M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CA Respondent by : Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement…

M/S.Gmr Hyderabad International Airport Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

ITA 620/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Ms.Padmavathy S, AM ITA No.620/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 ITA No.633/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 ITA No.603/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 ITA No.604/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/s.GMR Hyderabad The Deputy Commissioner of International Airport Limited Income-tax, Central Circle 2(2) v. No.25/1 Skip House, Bangalore. Museum Road Bangalore – 560 025. PAN : AABCH3448M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CA Respondent by : Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement…

M/S. Gms Hyderabad International Airport Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

ITA 604/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Ms.Padmavathy S, AM ITA No.620/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 ITA No.633/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 ITA No.603/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 ITA No.604/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/s.GMR Hyderabad The Deputy Commissioner of International Airport Limited Income-tax, Central Circle 2(2) v. No.25/1 Skip House, Bangalore. Museum Road Bangalore – 560 025. PAN : AABCH3448M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CA Respondent by : Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement…

M/S. Gmr Hyderabad International Airport Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

ITA 603/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Ms.Padmavathy S, AM ITA No.620/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 ITA No.633/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 ITA No.603/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 ITA No.604/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/s.GMR Hyderabad The Deputy Commissioner of International Airport Limited Income-tax, Central Circle 2(2) v. No.25/1 Skip House, Bangalore. Museum Road Bangalore – 560 025. PAN : AABCH3448M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Sunil Kumar Jain, CA Respondent by : Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement…

M/S Volvo India Pvt. Ltd., Hosakote vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 687/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40

…uring the course of assessment proceedings. It is settled principle of law that non-enquiry by the AO on an issue confers jurisdiction on the CIT to revise the assessment. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd.(341 ITR 293), following the judgment of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. vs. CIT (243 ITR 83), held that where deduction was allowed by the AO without indicating the basis, that could be considered as an order both erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue vide paras.27 & 28 which read as under:- “27. The assessing aut…

Gensuite Software Systems & Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals -3, Bangalore

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

ITA 671/BANG/2020[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Ramakrishna, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ananda H., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 37

…. This is an erroneous assumption concluded by the CIT Appeal. He ought to have observed that the Form says only "Disclose" and not disallow such expenditure incurred. The Appellant, for allowance of expenditure, has relied on Jurisdictional High Court (2012) 349 ITR 610 (Kar) - CIT Vs. Infosvs Technologies Ltd.Also in the case of (2019) 416 ITR 546 (Ker) CIT Vs. Apollo Tvres Ltd.has concluded in favour of the Appellant. 4. For these and any other additional Grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing either orally or in writing and further the appellant reserves its right to amend and revise the grounds of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2973/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…o -Oman DTAA. 6. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the order of Hon'ble ITAT which is not in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 341 ITR 293 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has dealt with issue of tax credit in DTAA between Canada and Thailand and decided the issue in favour of revenue holding that CIT has rightly invoked section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2972/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…o -Oman DTAA. 6. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the order of Hon'ble ITAT which is not in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 341 ITR 293 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has dealt with issue of tax credit in DTAA between Canada and Thailand and decided the issue in favour of revenue holding that CIT has rightly invoked section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT…

M/S. Krishak Bharti Cooperative Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2342/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…o -Oman DTAA. 6. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the order of Hon'ble ITAT which is not in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 341 ITR 293 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has dealt with issue of tax credit in DTAA between Canada and Thailand and decided the issue in favour of revenue holding that CIT has rightly invoked section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT…

M/S. Krishak Bharti Cooperative Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2341/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…o -Oman DTAA. 6. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the order of Hon'ble ITAT which is not in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 341 ITR 293 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has dealt with issue of tax credit in DTAA between Canada and Thailand and decided the issue in favour of revenue holding that CIT has rightly invoked section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT…

M/S. Hindustan Insecticides Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3772/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kul Bharat(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Hindustan Vs. Dcit (Ltu) Insecticides Ltd., New Delhi 2Nd Floor, Core-6, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-03 Pan : Aaach 0905 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajesh Arora, C.A. Revenue By Shri Lakshminarayan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 26.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.11.2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am :

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) M/s. Hindustan Vs. DCIT (LTU) Insecticides Ltd., New Delhi 2nd Floor, Core-6, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-03 PAN : AAACH 0905 Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Rajesh Arora, C.A. Revenue by Shri Lakshminarayan, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 26.10.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 24.11.2021 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.04.2016 of the Commissioner of Inco…

JCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Biocon Ltd., Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 558/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…ture is incurred in relation to the business of the assessee and hence is allowable as deduction while computing the taxable income of the Company. The Ld.AR relied on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT vs.Infosys Technologies reported in 360 ITR 714. Page 36 of 51 IT(TP)A No. 230/Bang/2014, IT(TP)A Nos. 557 & 558/Bang/2016 & C.O. No. 20/Bang/2017 14.1 On the contrary the Ld.CIT DR relied on orders passed by authorities below. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides based on the records placed before us. 14.2 Assessee incurred expenditure towards ease of traffic congestion in H…

Biocon Limited, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 557/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…ture is incurred in relation to the business of the assessee and hence is allowable as deduction while computing the taxable income of the Company. The Ld.AR relied on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT vs.Infosys Technologies reported in 360 ITR 714. Page 36 of 51 IT(TP)A No. 230/Bang/2014, IT(TP)A Nos. 557 & 558/Bang/2016 & C.O. No. 20/Bang/2017 14.1 On the contrary the Ld.CIT DR relied on orders passed by authorities below. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides based on the records placed before us. 14.2 Assessee incurred expenditure towards ease of traffic congestion in H…

Pawansut Media Services Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT - 7, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 534/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(viia)

…9.11.2017. 12. Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd., vs., CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83 [SC]. 13. Rajmandir Estates (P.) Ltd., vs., PCIT [2016] 386 ITR 162 (Cal.) 14. Rajmandir Estates (P.) Ltd., vs., PCIT [2017] 245 Taxman 127 [SC]. 15. CIT vs., Infosys Technologies Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Kar.) 16. Gee Vee Enterprises vs., Addl. CIT 99 ITR 374 (Del.) 16 ITA.No.534/Del./2021 Pawansut Media Services Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 17. Order of ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., vide ITA.No.3046/Del./ 2016 dated 11.01.2019. 18. Order of ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Ramesh Kumar vide ITA.No.1982/Del./2018 da…

M/S. Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 707/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Ashok A.Kulkarni, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)

…re is no addition / increase to premises on account of incurring of the impugned expenditure. 5 ITA No.707/Bang/2020. M/s.Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Limited. 6.2 The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Infosys Technologies (No.2) (2012) 349 ITR 588 (Kar.) had held that incurring of expenditure towards brick work, cement, plastering, painting walls, laying ceramic tiles, steel grill, internal sanitary fixtures, sewerage works, supply of fixing of water supply pipes, are revenue expenditure. In the case considered by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, the assessee had incurred expenditure…

Rutvi Oilfields Services Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. Pr. CIT, Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3291/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

…C) viii. Shree Manjunathesware Packing Products & Camphor Works Vs CIT [1998] 96 Taxman 1 (SC)/[1998] 231 ITR 53 (SC)/[1997] 143 CTR 406 (SC) ix. PTC Impex (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (ITA No. 2860/Del/2010 dated 03.04.2018) x. CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 order dated 04.01.2012 (Kar. HC) xi. CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd. 65 ITD 263 xii. Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 99 ITR 375 xiii. Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 3046/Del/2016 order dated 11.01.2019) xiv. Ramesh Kumar (ITA No. 1982/Del/2018 order dated 25.01.2019) 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available o…

M/S Dhara Dealers Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-13(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 523/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…id presumption, is thus converted into a conclusive proof of the fact that the order was passed by the assessing officer after due application of mind. Meerut Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.I.T., ITA No. 116 /Coch/ 2012; CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exerc…