What is CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. authority for?

An assessment order is not erroneous or prejudicial under Section 263 merely because it is silent on a claim or lacks explicit reasons for its acceptance. Revision under Section 263 is impermissible if the Assessing Officer has taken a plausible view, even if the PCIT holds a different opinion.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd.?

149 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. (309 ITR 67), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 263, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 139(1), Section 153A, Section 131.

CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. (309 ITR 67)

Mojilal Rajput, Shujalpur Mandi vs. ITO, Shajapur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 21/IND/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mehta & Shri ApurvaFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 44ASection 80C

…on the AO. On this count, he has further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Kamal Galani, reported in (2018) 95 taxmann.com 261 (Gujarat) and CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd., reported in [2009] 309 ITR 67 (Guj.), wherein Hon’ble High Court held as under: “22. The contention on behalf of the revenue that the assessment border does not reflect any application of mind as to the eligibility or otherwise under section 80-1 of the Act requires to be noted to be rejected. An assessment order cannot incorporate reasons for making/granting a claim of deduct…

Mojilal Rajput, Sujalpur Mandi vs. The ITO, Shajapur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 20/IND/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mehta & Shri ApurvaFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 44ASection 80C

…on the AO. On this count, he has further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Kamal Galani, reported in (2018) 95 taxmann.com 261 (Gujarat) and CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd., reported in [2009] 309 ITR 67 (Guj.), wherein Hon’ble High Court held as under: “22. The contention on behalf of the revenue that the assessment border does not reflect any application of mind as to the eligibility or otherwise under section 80-1 of the Act requires to be noted to be rejected. An assessment order cannot incorporate reasons for making/granting a claim of deduct…

Bharat Malhotra (Prop M/S Shri Nathji Jewels), Karnal vs. Pr, CIT, Rohtak

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

ITA 826/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, CIT- DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263

…case of inadequate inquiry. Our view is fortified by the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Nirav Modi, [2016] 71 Taxmann.com 272 (Bombay). 28. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. 309 ITR 67 has observed as under: “if assessment order were to incorporate the reasons for upholding the claim made by an assessee, the result would be an epitome and not an assessment order. In this case, during the assessment proceedings for both the Assessment Years, the Assessing . A.Y. 2009-10 Officer issued a query memo to the assessee, calling upon h…

Shri Prashant Agrawal, Bhopal vs. Pr. CIT -I, Bhopal

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 561/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N. DFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Mitra, CIT.D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…on the AO. On this count, he has further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Kamal Galani, reported in (2018) 95 taxmann.com 261 (Gujarat) and CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd., reported in [2009] 309 ITR 67 (Guj.), wherein Hon’ble High Court held as under: “22. The contention on behalf of the revenue that the assessment border does not reflect any application of mind as to the eligibility or otherwise under section 80-1 of the Act requires to be noted to be rejected. An assessment order cannot incorporate reasons for making/granting a claim of deduc…

Samir Yogendrabhai Parikh, Na

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 102/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) Samir Yogendrabhai Parikh. The Pr.Cit, Alka Society, Chhapara Road, Valsad. Vs. Dist.-Navsari-396445, Gujarat. Pan No. Abgpp 6727 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263

…not lead to a conclusion that the assessment order calls for interference by invoking jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. To support such submissions, the ld. Senior Counsel relied upon the following case laws: (i) CIT Vs Nirma Chemicals Works (P) Ltd. 309 ITR 67 (Guj) (ii) Gujarat Power Corporation Vs ACIT 350 ITR 266 (Guj) (iii) Rayon Silk Mills Vs CIT 221 ITR 155 @ 158-159 (Guj) (iv) Hari Iron Trading Co. Vs CIT (2003) 263 ITR 437 (P&H) (v) CIT Vs Gabriel India Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bom) (vi) CIT Vs Vikas Polymers 341 ITR 537 (Del) (vii)CIT Vs Honda Siel Power Products 333 ITR 547 @ 557-558 (Del) 7.…

M/S. Yatharth Infrastructures (P) Ltd., Ujjain vs. Pr. CIT, Ujjain

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 532/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Memebr & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Parth Jhavar, ARs

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…on the AO. On this count, he has further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Kamal Galani, reported in (2018) 95 taxmann.com 261 (Gujarat) and CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd., reported in [2009] 309 ITR 67 (Guj.), wherein Hon’ble High Court held as under: “22. The contention on behalf of the revenue that the assessment border does not reflect any application of mind as to the eligibility or otherwise under section 80-1 of the Act requires to be noted to be rejected. An assessment order cannot incorporate reasons for making/granting a claim of deduc…

Veer Plastics Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT -4, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 456/AHD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: ShriA. P. Singh, CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 263Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

…the final assessment order, then that, by itself would not lead to a conclusion that order of Assessing Officer calls for interference by Pr. CIT u/s 263 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the followings decisions: " CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd. - 309 ITR 67 (Guj) " Gujarat Power Corporation vs. ACIT - 350 ITR 266 (Guj) " Rayon Silk Mills vs CIT - 221 ITR 155 @ 158-159 (Guj) " Had Iron Trading Co. v. CIT 12003] 263 ITR 437 (P&H) " CIT v. Gabriel India Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 108 (Bom) " CIT vs. Vikas Polymers - 341 ITR 537 (Del) " CIT vs Honda Siel Power Products - 333 ITR 547 @ 557-558 (Del) " Jai Rashmi…

The Deutsche Investments India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 12, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3169/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 92C

…ssment order. It is an accepted position that the assessment orders would necessarily deal only with the claims being disallowed and not with the claims being allowed. This is for the reason as observed by the Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs. Nirma Chemicals Ltd 309 ITR 67, that if the Assessing Officer was to deal with all the claims which were to be allowed in the assessment order, the result would be an epictome. This is so, as it would cast an impossible burden upon the Assessing Officer considering his workload and the period of limitation. There was also no reason in the present facts for the Assessing Officer…

Gunveer Singh Chhabra, Indore vs. The Pr CIT -1, Indore

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 117/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Memebr & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Shubhash Jain, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 263

…order is appealable one. On this count, he has further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Kamal Galani reported in (2018) 95 taxmann.com 261 (Gujarat) and CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 67 (Guj.), wherein Hon’ble High Court held as under: “22. The contention on behalf of the revenue that the assessment border does not reflect any application of mind as to the eligibility or otherwise under section 80-1 of the Act requires to be noted to be rejected. An assessment order cannot incorporate reasons for making/granting a claim of deduc…

Mukesh Bhoormal Jain, Mumbai vs. Principle CIT - 19, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 542/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 69C

…y those issues in respect of which the Assessee has not been able to satisfy him and give reasons for his conclusion. This would enable the Assessee to challenge the same, if aggrieved. In fact the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 67/182 Taxman 183 has observed that if an assessment order were to incorporate the reasons for upholding the claim made by an assessee, the result would be an epitome and not an assessment order. In this case, during the assessment proceedings for both the Assessment Years, the Assessing Officer issued a query memos to the assessee, calling upon him…

Balvinder Singh, Haryana vs. Pr, CIT, Rohtak

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

ITA 570/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…case of inadequate inquiry. Our view is fortified by the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Nirav Modi, [2016] 71 Taxmann.com 272 (Bombay). 17. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. 309 ITR 67 has observed as under: “if assessment order were to incorporate the reasons for upholding the claim made by an assessee, the result would be an epitome and not an assessment order. In this case, during the assessment proceedings for both the Assessment Years, the Assessing . A.Y. 2009-10 Officer issued a query memo to the assessee, calling upon…

Ajay Garg, Bulandshahr vs. ITO, Bulandshahr

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

ITA 691/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2017-18 Ajay Garg Vs. Pr. Cit Prop. Abhay Trading Ghaziabad Company, Anupshahr Nayi Mandi, Bullandshahr- 203001 Pan No.Abfpg1600G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 263Section 263(1)

…case of inadequate inquiry. Our view is fortified by the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Nirav Modi, [2016] 71 Taxmann.com 272 (Bombay)". 13. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. 309 ITR 67 has observed as under: “if assessment order were to incorporate the reasons for upholding the claim made by an assessee, the result would be an epitome and not an assessment order. In this case, during the assessment proceedings for both the Assessment Years, the Assessing . A.Y. 2009-10 Officer issued a query memo to the assessee, calling upon h…

Juniper Networks International B.V., Mumbai vs. CIT (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

ITA 982/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 982/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2014-15) Juniper Networks International B.V, Boeing Avenue 240, 1119Pz Schipol-Rijk, Amsterdam,0 Netherlands Pan: Aadcj-0974-G ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It), Mumbai -3, Room No.1601, 16Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 .....""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr. Advocate With Ms. Prachi Mehta &Shri Sandeep Bhalla ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Surabhi Sharma & Shri Milind Chavan सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 13/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Prachi Mehta &Shri Sandeep BhallaFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma &

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण मुंबईपीठ“आइ” "ी"वकासअव"थी, "या"यकसद"यएवं "ीएमबालगणेश, लेखाकारसद"यकेसम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं. 982/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2014-15) Juniper Networks International B.V, Boeing Avenue 240, 1119pz Schipol-Rijk, Amsterdam,0 Netherlands PAN: AADCJ-0974-G ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT), Mumbai -3, Room No.1601, 16th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 .....""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr. A…

Diamond Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-2, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 208/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 208/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Diamond Beverages Private Limited Pr. Cit, Kolkata - 2 P-41, Taratala Road Vs Taratala Kolkata – 700 088 Pan : Aabcd3346C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : S. Agarwal, Aca Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/07/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajpal Yadav:

For Appellant: S. Agarwal, ACAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, CIT, D/R

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 37Section 80G

…s unsustainable in law. Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Max Indla Ltd (295 ITR 282) (SC), Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd V UOI 287 ITR 120, CIT Pankaj Dhirajlal Dhruve 305 ITR 322, CIT v Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt Ltd 309 ITR 67, Aryan Arcade Limited v CIT 84 Taxmann.com 293(Gujrat) Prayer: In view the above, and in view of the jurisdictional Kolkata ITAT ruling in the case of JMS Mining (supra), it is humbly prayed that as none of the reasons required to invoke proceedings under section 263 of the Act are satisfied, your Honour may be pleased to drop the proceedings init…

Genpact Consulting (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. (Earlier Known As 'Headstrong Consulting Pte. Ltd.'), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1) Int. Tax., New Delhi

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

ITA 501/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 2(47)Section 263Section 45Section 47

…case of inadequate inquiry. Our view is fortified by the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Nirav Modi, [2016] 71 Taxmann.com 272 (Bombay)". 28. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. 309 ITR 67 has observed as under: “if assessment order were to incorporate the reasons for upholding the claim made by an assessee, the result would be an epitome and not an assessment order. In this case, during the assessment proceedings for both the Assessment Years, the Assessing . A.Y. 2009-10 Officer issued a query memo to the assessee, calling upon h…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1474/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2018, 2019/Ahd/2014 (A Y: 2008-09 & 2009-10) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT ITA Nos. 497 & 498/Ahd/2015 (AY: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ank…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1473/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2018, 2019/Ahd/2014 (A Y: 2008-09 & 2009-10) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT ITA Nos. 497 & 498/Ahd/2015 (AY: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ank…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1471/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2018, 2019/Ahd/2014 (A Y: 2008-09 & 2009-10) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT ITA Nos. 497 & 498/Ahd/2015 (AY: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ank…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1845/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2018, 2019/Ahd/2014 (A Y: 2008-09 & 2009-10) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT ITA Nos. 497 & 498/Ahd/2015 (AY: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ank…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax., Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2018, 2019/Ahd/2014 (A Y: 2008-09 & 2009-10) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT ITA Nos. 497 & 498/Ahd/2015 (AY: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Vs. Gujarat-393002. Circle-Bharuch. PAN : AAACE 4126 G APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Enviro Technology Ltd., A.C.I.T. 2413/14, GIDC, Ank…

CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd.

What is CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd.

Mojilal Rajput, Shujalpur Mandi vs. ITO, Shajapur

Mojilal Rajput, Sujalpur Mandi vs. The ITO, Shajapur

Bharat Malhotra (Prop M/S Shri Nathji Jewels), Karnal vs. Pr, CIT, Rohtak

Shri Prashant Agrawal, Bhopal vs. Pr. CIT -I, Bhopal

Samir Yogendrabhai Parikh, Na

M/S. Yatharth Infrastructures (P) Ltd., Ujjain vs. Pr. CIT, Ujjain

Veer Plastics Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT -4, Ahmedabad

The Deutsche Investments India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 12, Mumbai

Gunveer Singh Chhabra, Indore vs. The Pr CIT -1, Indore

Mukesh Bhoormal Jain, Mumbai vs. Principle CIT - 19, Mumbai

Balvinder Singh, Haryana vs. Pr, CIT, Rohtak

Ajay Garg, Bulandshahr vs. ITO, Bulandshahr

Juniper Networks International B.V., Mumbai vs. CIT (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

Diamond Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-2, Kolkata

Genpact Consulting (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. (Earlier Known As 'Headstrong Consulting Pte. Ltd.'), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1) Int. Tax., New Delhi

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax., Bharuch