Concrete and Allied Products: 236 ITR 595 (CAL) and (ii) National Horticulture Board v. Union of India

253 ITR 12Reported decision2002#13857 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2022.

Judgments citing Concrete and Allied Products: 236 ITR 595 (CAL) and (ii) National Horticulture Board v. Union of India

ACIT-Central Circle -1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Aarti International Ltd., Ludhiana

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 102/CHANDI/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Cit(A)?

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(2)Section 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH "ी सुधांशु "ीवा"तव, "या"यक सद"य, एवं "ी "व"म "संह यादव, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 102/Chd/ 2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 ACIT- Central Circle-1 M/s Aarti International Ltd. बनाम SCO 1-6, 2nd Floor Opp. G.T. Road, Milerganj, B.V.M. School, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana – 141001, Punjab Ludhiana- 141001, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCA4454C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shr…

Wipro Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

WP/20040/2019HC Karnataka25 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit Writ Petition No.20040/2019 (T-It) Between:

Section 1Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 254Section 92C

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.20040/2019 (T-IT) BETWEEN: WIPRO LIMITED, DODDAKANNELLI, SARJAAPUR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 035, REP. BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT – TAXATION, SRI BALASUBRAMANIAN K., SON OF SRI KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS. … PETITIONER (BY SHRI S.GANESH, SR. COUNSEL A/W. SHRI VENKATESH S. ARBATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-7, 2ND FLOOR, INCOME TAX OFFICE, BMTC BUILDING, 8 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA,…

Bajaj Holdings & Investment Ltd (Formerly Known As Bajaj Auto Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu) 1, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7457/MUM/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154

…herefore there is no question of applicability of section 244A(ii) of the Act. The Ld. A.R. in defence of his argument relied on the decision of CIT(A) vs. Larson and Turbo Ltd. (2011) 330 ITR 340 (Bombay) and National Horticulture Board vs. UOI & Ors. (2002) 253 ITR 12 P&H. Finally, the Ld. A.R. submitted that there is no dispute that assessee is eligible for interest under section 144A of the Act in respect of additional TDS credit from 01.05.2007 to 20.06.2014 since the refunds were lying with the department during the said period. Finally, the Ld. A.R. prayed before the Bench that AO may kindly be directed to…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. India Trade Promotion Organization

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA - 549 / 2008HC Delhi29 Jul 2008
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata BansalFor Respondent: None
Section 10Section 154Section 244A

…of the assessee. The Tribunal considered the decisions of the Calcutta High Court as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court in (i) DCIT v. Central Concrete and Allied Products: 236 ITR 595 (CAL) and (ii) National Horticulture Board v. Union of India: 253 ITR 12 (P & H). These decisions clearly established that the entitlement to interest under Section 244A is a substantive and an inherent right. 5. The only issue, therefore, which was there before the Tribunal was whether the assessee had waived its right to interest. An affidavit of the Executive Director of the assessee company had been pl…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. India Trade Promotion Organization

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA - 548 / 2008HC Delhi29 Jul 2008
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata BansalFor Respondent: None
Section 10Section 154Section 244A

…of the assessee. The Tribunal considered the decisions of the Calcutta High Court as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court in (i) DCIT v. Central Concrete and Allied Products: 236 ITR 595 (CAL) and (ii) National Horticulture Board v. Union of India: 253 ITR 12 (P & H). These decisions clearly established that the entitlement to interest under Section 244A is a substantive and an inherent right. 5. The only issue, therefore, which was there before the Tribunal was whether the assessee had waived its right to interest. An affidavit of the Executive Director of the assessee company had been pl…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. India Trade Promotion Organization

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/549/2008HC Delhi29 Jul 2008
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata BansalFor Respondent: None
Section 10Section 154Section 244A

…of the assessee. The Tribunal considered the decisions of the Calcutta High Court as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court in (i) DCIT v. Central Concrete and Allied Products: 236 ITR 595 (CAL) and (ii) National Horticulture Board v. Union of India: 253 ITR 12 (P & H). These decisions clearly established that the entitlement to interest under Section 244A is a substantive and an inherent right. 5. The only issue, therefore, which was there before the Tribunal was whether the assessee had waived its right to interest. An affidavit of the Executive Director of the assessee company had been pl…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. India Trade Promotion Organization

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/548/2008HC Delhi29 Jul 2008
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata BansalFor Respondent: None
Section 10Section 154Section 244A

…of the assessee. The Tribunal considered the decisions of the Calcutta High Court as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court in (i) DCIT v. Central Concrete and Allied Products: 236 ITR 595 (CAL) and (ii) National Horticulture Board v. Union of India: 253 ITR 12 (P & H). These decisions clearly established that the entitlement to interest under Section 244A is a substantive and an inherent right. 5. The only issue, therefore, which was there before the Tribunal was whether the assessee had waived its right to interest. An affidavit of the Executive Director of the assessee company had been pl…

Concrete and Allied Products: 236 ITR 595 (CAL) and (ii) National Horticulture Board v. Union of India (253 ITR 12) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax