Commissioner of Income Tax v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd.

262 ITR 260High Court2003#877 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. authority for?

Journal entries for accepting or repaying loans and deposits, without any actual cash transaction, do not violate the provisions of Section 269SS or Section 269T of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, such transactions do not attract penalties under Section 271D or Section 271E.

121

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. · Section 269SS journal entry · Section 269T journal entry · Penalty under Section 271D · Penalty under Section 271E · Loan repayment journal entry · Deposit acceptance journal entry · No cash payment · Journal entry · Contravention of 269SS 269T · Deemed cash transaction · Section 273B reasonable cause

Also reported as

30 Taxmann.com 207139 Taxmann 115

Sections most often in play

Section 271DSection 271ESection 269SSSection 269TSection 273BSection 275Section 143(3)Section 143

Issues it is cited on

section 275(1)(a)section 275(1)penalty under section 271epenalty under section 271dsection 275(1)(c)section 269tsection 271esection 269ssection 273section 275section 269sssection 271d

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd.

JCIT(OSD), CC-1, LKO, LUCKNOW vs. ACP TOLLWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and the Cross\nObjection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 131/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143(2)Section 32

…{ "clean_text": "I.T.A. No.131/Lkw/2024\nC.O.No.14/Lkw/2024\n1\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nLUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW\nBEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nI.T.A. No.131/Lkw/2024\n Assessment year:2021-22\nJCIT (OSD),\nC.C.-1, Lucknow\n(Appellant)\nVs. ACP Tollways Private Limited,\nB-9, Vibhuti Khand,\nGomti Nagar, Lucknow.\nPAN:AAKCA0630M\n(Respondent)\nC.O.No.14/Lkw/2024\n(in I.T.A. No.131/Lkw/2024)\n Assessment year:2021-22\nACP Tollways Private Limited,\nB-9, Vibhuti Khand,\nGomti Nagar, Lucknow.\nPAN:AAKCA0630M\n(Appellant)\nVs. JCIT (…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S KIRAN FINE JEWELLERS PVT LTD. , JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 274/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.268, 270, 271 & 274/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner of Income बनाम Tax, Central Circle-02, Jaipur Vs. Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Limited F-19, Gautam Marg, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AADCK7512P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CA राजस्व

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…her been stated that repayment of loan through journal entry would not tantamount to contravention of provisions of Section 269T of the Act. In support of this contention, the assessee has relied upon various case-laws(1) CIT Vs. Noida Toll Bridge Col. Ltd 262 ITR 260 (Del), (2) CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel (2009) 315 ITR (P&H), M/s Lodha Builders P Ltd Vs. ACIT (2014) ITR 34 ITR 157 (ITAT, Bombay). Alternatively, it is also stated that the penalty proceedings are barred by limitation as the same have not been passed after expiry of financial year in which the quantum proceedings were completed. The assessee…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S KIRAN FINE JEWELLERS PVT LTD. , JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 271/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.268, 270, 271 & 274/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner of Income बनाम Tax, Central Circle-02, Jaipur Vs. Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Limited F-19, Gautam Marg, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AADCK7512P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CA राजस्व

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…her been stated that repayment of loan through journal entry would not tantamount to contravention of provisions of Section 269T of the Act. In support of this contention, the assessee has relied upon various case-laws(1) CIT Vs. Noida Toll Bridge Col. Ltd 262 ITR 260 (Del), (2) CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel (2009) 315 ITR (P&H), M/s Lodha Builders P Ltd Vs. ACIT (2014) ITR 34 ITR 157 (ITAT, Bombay). Alternatively, it is also stated that the penalty proceedings are barred by limitation as the same have not been passed after expiry of financial year in which the quantum proceedings were completed. The assessee…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S KIRAN FINE JEWELLERS PVT LTD. , JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 270/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…her been stated that repayment of loan through journal entry would not tantamount to contravention of provisions of Section 269T of the Act. In support of this contention, the assessee has relied upon various case-laws(1) CIT Vs. Noida Toll Bridge Col. Ltd 262 ITR 260 (Del), (2) CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel (2009) 315 ITR (P&H), M/s Lodha Builders P Ltd Vs. ACIT (2014) ITR 34 ITR 157 (ITAT, Bombay). Alternatively, it is also stated that the penalty proceedings are barred by limitation as the same have not been passed after expiry of financial year in which the quantum proceedings were completed. The assessee…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S KIRAN FINE JEWELLERS PVT LTD. , JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 268/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.268, 270, 271 & 274/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner of Income बनाम Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Tax, Vs. Limited Central Circle-02, Jaipur F-19, Gautam Marg, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AADCK7512P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri R. K. Bhatra, CA राजस्व की

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

…her been stated that repayment of loan through journal entry would not tantamount to contravention of provisions of Section 269T of the Act. In support of this contention, the assessee has relied upon various case-laws(1) CIT Vs. Noida Toll Bridge Col. Ltd 262 ITR 260 (Del), (2) CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel (2009) 315 ITR (P&H), M/s Lodha Builders P Ltd Vs. ACIT (2014) ITR 34 ITR 157 (ITAT, Bombay). Alternatively, it is also stated that the penalty proceedings are barred by limitation as the same have not been passed after expiry of financial year in which the quantum proceedings were completed. The assessee…

JEEVANGANI FILMS,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE -16(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 382/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidarajeevangani Films Vs Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Plot No.53/1, Media Infotek Range-16(1), Mumbai Park Road No.7, Opp. Ackruti Trade Centre, Midc, Marol, Andheir (E), Mumbai -400 093 Pan : Aajfj9661M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik,(SR DR)
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 250Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jeevangani Films vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Plot No.53/1, Media Infotek Range-16(1), Mumbai Park Road No.7, Opp. Ackruti Trade Centre, MIDC, Marol, Andheir (E), Mumbai -400 093 PAN : AAJFJ9661M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Joshi Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik,(SR DR) Date of hearing : 03/03/2025 Date of pronouncement : 06/03/2025 O R D E R PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against th…

NILONS ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. WARD 2(4), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1600/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 269TSection 271E

…4] 2 SOT 543 (Luck) wherein it has been held journal entries in the book of accounts indicating deposit/loans will not fall foul of Section 269SS of the Act. Besides, the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. [2004] 139 Taxman 115/ [2003] 262 ITR 260 inter alia held that payment of Rs.4.85 crores made by the assesses by a 20 ITA.No.1600/PUN./2024 journal entry in its books of account by crediting the account of ILFS, would not fall foul of Section 269SS of the Act. This particularly in the absence of any payment being made in cash. (i) In the present facts, the period during which the jou…

MODESTY GARMENTS,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-28(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2574/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Modesty Garments Vs Jcit B-304, New Friends Colony Range-28(1) New Delhi-110025. New Delhi Pan-Aaafm1598F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Mohit Gupta, Ca Shri Nitin Sharma, Ca & Shri Neeraj Singh, Ca Respondent By Shri Anshul, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 03.01.2025

Section 250Section 269T

…n, repayment of the outstanding by the partnership firm to the partner would not attract s.269T of the Act and consequently penalty under s. 271E would not be attracted. 6.2. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 260 (Del) order dated 28.01.2003; CIT-VI vs Worldwide Township Projects Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 433 (Del), have held that when no payment is made in cash but the same is effected by journal entry in the books of accounts of the assessee, there is no violation of s. 269SS or s.269T so as to warrant imposition of penalty under s. 271D or s. 271E of the Act…

OTM JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL RANGE, MEERUT

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

ITA 1135/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 132(1)Section 153CSection 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…ease Ltd dated 17,.10.2016 Hon'ble Allahabad High Court ii) CIT Vs. National Clothing Co. 2014 SCC Online Del 7253 iii) CIT Vs. Worldwide Township Projects 367 ITR 433 iv) CIT Vs. Saurabh Enterprises 269 CTR 451(Allahabad) v) CIT Vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. 262 ITR 260 vi) DCIT Vs. International Softweb 2016 SCC ITAT 1901 vii) ACIT Vs. Vardhan Fashion 60 TAxmann.com 407 viii) ACIT Vs. Ruchika Chemicals and Investment ITA No, 1466/DEL/1997 dated 18.04.2022 ix) ITO Vs. Amar Nath Shivrah HUF 1 SOT 346 [Agra] x) CIT Vs. Bombay Conductors & Electricals Ltd 173 Taxmann 434 xi) ACIT Vs. Lala Murari Lal & Sons 2 S…

M/S KIRAN SANRAN ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 791/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Naveen RanderFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 43C

…nyandeo Aade towards flat No.C-706, EVA, Bavdhan, Pune is not in cash and the provisions of section 269SS of the Act are not applicable. Referring 11 to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co Ltd. reported in 262 ITR 260 (Del), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that when no payment is made in cash but the same is effected by a journal entry in the books of account of assessee, there is no violation of provisions of section 269SS of the Act. He submitted that a similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan…

DCIT CEN CIR 8(2), MUMBAI vs. WHITE FEATHER FILMS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 7642/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7642/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7651/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) Dcit, Central, Circle-8(2) बिधम/ M/S. White Feather Films 6Th Floor, Room No. 658, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Svp Nagar, Mhada Road, Mumbai-400020. Bungalow No. 91, Four Bungalow, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacw4428R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Gopal A/W M/S. Neha Paranjpe Revenue By: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai Dated 20.09.2016 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Against The Penalty Confirmed By Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Ao) U/S 271E/271D Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal a/wFor Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath (Sr. AR)
Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…rnal entries in the book of accounts indicating deposit/ loans will not fall foul of Section 269SS of the Besides, the Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax ITA No.6607/Mum/2016 & 6609/Mum/2016 National Standard India Ltd., Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. 262 ITR 260 inter alia held that payment of Rs.4.85 crores made by the assesses by a journal entry in its books of account by crediting the account of A.Y. 2010-11 M/s. White Feather Films Ltd ILFS, would not fall foul of Section 269SS of the Act. This particularly in the absence of any payment being made in cash. (i) In the present facts, the period during…

DCIT-15(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TRANSLANDS INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS P LTD, VASHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1913/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Translands Income-Tax, 15(3)(1), Infrastructure Developers Mumbai P. Ltd. Jn-3-14-5, Asshirwad Chs, Sector-09, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadct 0036 B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Rupa NandaFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 269SSection 271DSection 273BSection 3Section 68

…amount of such loan or deposit or the aggregate amount of such loan or deposit is Rs. 10,000 or more. The amount of Rs. 10,000 was later revised as Rs. 20,000 with effect from 1-4-1989." c) The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. In 262 ITR 260 held as under:- Provisions of section 266SS are not attracted because:-  Transaction was by way of account payee cheque.  No payment on account was made in cash either by assessee or on its behalf.  No loan was accepted by assessee in cash.  Payment of Rs.4.8 crore made by assessee through IL & FS, which holds more than 30% of paid up capital…

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIZAG SEAPORT PRIVATE LIMITED, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 99/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Abepr 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"यअ"धकरण, "वशाखापटणम पीठ, "वशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस बालाकृ"णन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, PAN: ABEPR 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.944/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year…

VIZAG SEAPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OR INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 83/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Abepr 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"यअ"धकरण, "वशाखापटणम पीठ, "वशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस बालाकृ"णन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, PAN: ABEPR 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.944/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year…

VIZAG SEAPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 944/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Abepr 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"यअ"धकरण, "वशाखापटणम पीठ, "वशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस बालाकृ"णन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, PAN: ABEPR 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.944/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S MAHAVIR BUILD ESTATE PVT LTD , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal preferred by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1405/MUM/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2009-2010
For Appellant: Shri Gunajjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Somaiya
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Deputy, Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai Room No. 655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 ……………… Appellant Vs M/s Mahavir Build Estate Pvt. Ltd., (Successor to Mahavir Build Estate Private Limited), 216, Shah & Nahar Industrial Estate, Off Dr. E. Mose Road, Worli, Mumbai - 400018 [PAN:AAFCM074Q] ……………… Respondent Appearances For the Respondent/ Department : Shri Nishant Somaiya For the Appellant/ Assessee : Shri Gunajjan Kakkad Date of conclusion of hearing :…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, NASHIK vs. M/S. ASHOKA DHANKUNI KHARAGPUR TOLLWAY LIMITED,, NASHIK

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 143/PUN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.143/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Ashoka Dhankuni Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs Kharagpur Tollway Ltd., Nashik. . S No 861, Ashoka House, Ashoka Marg, Vadala, Nashik. Pan: Aajca 2569 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri B Koteswra Rao – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 27/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Pune- 12’S Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2020-21/1031080551(1) Dated 28.02.2021, In Proceedings U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ पुणे म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं. / ITA No.143/PUN/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s.Ashoka Dhankuni Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs Kharagpur Tollway Ltd., Nashik. . S No 861, Ashoka House, Ashoka Marg, Vadala, Nashik. PAN: AAJCA 2569 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Shri B Koteswra Rao – DR Date of hearing 08/09/2022 Date of pronouncement 27/09/2022 आदेश/ ORDER Per S.S.Godara, JM:…

VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A) 14, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2479/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…आयकर अपीऱीयअधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ, विशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्िूरु आर एऱ रेड्डी, न्याययक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बाऱाकृष्णन, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.2400/Mum/2014 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs. M/s. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd, Tax-7(3), Mumbai. Mumbai. PAN: AABCV 2484 K (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.2401/Mum/2014 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-1…

VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A) 14, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2478/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…आयकर अपीऱीयअधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ, विशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्िूरु आर एऱ रेड्डी, न्याययक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बाऱाकृष्णन, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.2400/Mum/2014 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs. M/s. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd, Tax-7(3), Mumbai. Mumbai. PAN: AABCV 2484 K (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.2401/Mum/2014 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-1…

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2402/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…आयकर अपीऱीयअधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ, विशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्िूरु आर एऱ रेड्डी, न्याययक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बाऱाकृष्णन, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.2400/Mum/2014 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs. M/s. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd, Tax-7(3), Mumbai. Mumbai. PAN: AABCV 2484 K (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.2401/Mum/2014 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-1…

Showing 1–20 of 121 · Page 1 of 7