Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara v. Labour Court, Bhilwara

Hcp Petrochem Pvt. Ltd, Through I.P. India Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As Adhunik Technology Pvt. Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishihcp Petrochem Pvt. Ltd, Through Ip Vs. Acit, India Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-18, (Now Known As Adhunik Technology New Delhi Pvt. Ltd, C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv F-36/124, Sector-7, Rohni, New Delhi Pan:Aabci0760K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…the date of the assessment order. The ITAT accepted the above plea of the Respondent- MSIL, as a result of which the assessment order was set aside. 9. On the strength of the decision of the Supreme Court in Kuldeep Kumar Dubey v. Ramesh Chandra Goyal [2015] 3 SCC 525, Mr. Asheesh Jain, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue, urges that in the present case the error, if at all, was a mere misdescription of the party in the assessment order and nothing more. This could not result in the assessment order itself being set aside. He further submits that the record of the assessment proceedings shows that MS…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 vs. Nokia Solutions & Networks India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As, Nokia Siemens

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

…answer books to the examinee and at the same time, they owe a duty to the examinee not to disclose the answer-books to anyone else, that is, any third party... “ 52. Reliance has also been placed on Reserve Bank of India vs Jayantilal N. Mistry (2016) 3 SCC 525. 53. It is further submitted that Section 8(3) of the RTI Act provides that exemptions under Section 8(1)(b), (d) to (h) and (j) shall cease to apply once the information pertains to an event that occurred over 20 years before the date of the RTI request. The only continuing exemptions are those under clauses (a), (c), and (i). 54. In the p…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-16 vs. Jagat Talkies Distributors

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…als (2013) 359 ITR 129 which in turn referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. M. Pirai Choodi (2011) 334 ITR 262 (SC). Mr. Hossain also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh(1996) 3 SCC 525 where it was held that mere failure to produce a witness for cross-examination would not vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. One more opportunity was given to the Assessee to go before the AO for that purpose. Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 17. Mr. Y.K. Kapur, learned counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand relied on the…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-16 vs. Jagat Talkies Distributors

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…als (2013) 359 ITR 129 which in turn referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. M. Pirai Choodi (2011) 334 ITR 262 (SC). Mr. Hossain also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh(1996) 3 SCC 525 where it was held that mere failure to produce a witness for cross-examination would not vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. One more opportunity was given to the Assessee to go before the AO for that purpose. Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 17. Mr. Y.K. Kapur, learned counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand relied on the…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-16 vs. Jagat Talkies Distributors

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…als (2013) 359 ITR 129 which in turn referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. M. Pirai Choodi (2011) 334 ITR 262 (SC). Mr. Hossain also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh(1996) 3 SCC 525 where it was held that mere failure to produce a witness for cross-examination would not vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. One more opportunity was given to the Assessee to go before the AO for that purpose. Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 17. Mr. Y.K. Kapur, learned counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand relied on the…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-16 vs. Jagat Talkies Distributors

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…als (2013) 359 ITR 129 which in turn referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. M. Pirai Choodi (2011) 334 ITR 262 (SC). Mr. Hossain also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh(1996) 3 SCC 525 where it was held that mere failure to produce a witness for cross-examination would not vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. One more opportunity was given to the Assessee to go before the AO for that purpose. Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 17. Mr. Y.K. Kapur, learned counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand relied on the…