Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (27 SOT 593)

Q: What is Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax authority for?

The Assessing Officer can allow deductions suo motu, even if not claimed by the assessee, when all information relating to the transaction is on record and duly evidenced.

Q: How many judgments cite Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax?

14 judgments on BharatTax cite Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (27 SOT 593), spanning 2016 to 2024.

ACIT, CC - I (2), Chennai vs. M/S. Balaji Hotels & Enterprises Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 209/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri V. Nandakumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(3)

…n if not claimed by the assessee directly when all ITA Nos.207 to 209/Chny/2020 the information relating to the transaction was on record and duly evidenced as it undisputably was in the instant case. (i). Emerson Network Power India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2009] 27 SOT 593 (mum) (ii). Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2007| 15 SOT 252 (Mum); and (iii). CIT vs. Ramco International (2009] 180 Taxman 584 (Punj. & Har.) (iy). CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) of 1955 dated April 11, 1955; (u). Dattatraya Gopal Shette vs. CIT [1984] 150 ITR 460 (Bom) (vi). Cholkshi Metal Refinery vs. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 63 (Guj.): (vii).…

ACIT, CC - I (2), Chennai vs. M/S. Balaji Hotels & Enterprises Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 208/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri V. Nandakumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(3)

…n if not claimed by the assessee directly when all ITA Nos.207 to 209/Chny/2020 the information relating to the transaction was on record and duly evidenced as it undisputably was in the instant case. (i). Emerson Network Power India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2009] 27 SOT 593 (mum) (ii). Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2007| 15 SOT 252 (Mum); and (iii). CIT vs. Ramco International (2009] 180 Taxman 584 (Punj. & Har.) (iy). CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) of 1955 dated April 11, 1955; (u). Dattatraya Gopal Shette vs. CIT [1984] 150 ITR 460 (Bom) (vi). Cholkshi Metal Refinery vs. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 63 (Guj.): (vii).…

ACIT, CC - I (2), Chennai vs. M/S. Balaji Hotels & Enterprises Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 207/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri V. Nandakumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(3)

…n if not claimed by the assessee directly when all ITA Nos.207 to 209/Chny/2020 the information relating to the transaction was on record and duly evidenced as it undisputably was in the instant case. (i). Emerson Network Power India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2009] 27 SOT 593 (mum) (ii). Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2007| 15 SOT 252 (Mum); and (iii). CIT vs. Ramco International (2009] 180 Taxman 584 (Punj. & Har.) (iy). CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) of 1955 dated April 11, 1955; (u). Dattatraya Gopal Shette vs. CIT [1984] 150 ITR 460 (Bom) (vi). Cholkshi Metal Refinery vs. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 63 (Guj.): (vii).…

M/S Bellary Iron-Ores Private Limited, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

ITA 15/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Shivprasad Reddy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 102Section 139(1)Section 173Section 194ASection 226(3)

…age 25 of 42 contract amount as accrued on submission of bills on completion of work - Held, yes" 5. The decision of the ITAT Mumbai 'H' Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 27 SOT 593 (MUM.) relied upon by the Id. D/R is not applicable to the facts of the case, for the reason that, what was considered by the Bench was performance bank guarantee and not retention money as in the case of the assessee company. Even otherwise, we are bound by the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Incom…

M/S Bellary Iron-Ores Pvt Ltd, Bellary vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Hospet

ITA 1540/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Shivprasad Reddy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 102Section 139(1)Section 173Section 194ASection 226(3)

…age 25 of 42 contract amount as accrued on submission of bills on completion of work - Held, yes" 5. The decision of the ITAT Mumbai 'H' Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 27 SOT 593 (MUM.) relied upon by the Id. D/R is not applicable to the facts of the case, for the reason that, what was considered by the Bench was performance bank guarantee and not retention money as in the case of the assessee company. Even otherwise, we are bound by the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Incom…

Bsr Infratech India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 697/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Madhusudhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R

Section 199Section 234ASection 270ASection 43Section 43C

…eating entire contract amount as accrued on submission of bills on completion of work - Held, yes" 5. The decision of the ITAT Mumbai 'H' Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 27 SOT 593 (MUM.) relied upon by the Id. D/R is not applicable to the facts of the case, for the reason that, what was considered by the Bench was performance bank guarantee and not retention money as in the case of the assessee company. Even otherwise, we are bound by the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Incom…

ACIT, Ncc - 11 (1), Chennai vs. Shri Anil Kumar Shantichand Mehta, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 302/CHNY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.302/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Shantichand Mehta, Income Tax, No. 196, Govindappa Naicken Street, Non Corporate Circle 11(1), George Town, Chennai 600 001. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Aavps4928E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Anand, Advdocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai, Dated 21.11.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: 1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) Is Contrary To Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Cit(A) Erroneously Held That The Assessee Had Not Claimed Exemption U/S.10(37) [P.8.2] Though The Assessee, Vide His Letter Dated 26-12-2018 Stated "The Compensation Of Rs.7,62,40,126/- Received Was Claimed Exempt U/S.10(37), However, It Was Erroneously Omitted To Be Mentioned In The Return Of Income Filed."

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand, Advdocate

Section 10(37)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 34Section 45Section 57

…issue could be raised in appeal for the first time before CIT(A) since all information relating to the said receipt was on record and duly evidenced in the instant case as per the following case laws: (i). Emerson Network Power India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2009J 27 SOT 593 (mum) (ii). Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. vs. DCIT [2007] 15 SOT 252 (Mum); and (iii). CIT vs. Ramco International [2009J 180 Taxman 584 (Punj. & Har.) (iv). Dattatraya Gopal Shette vs. CIT [1984J 150 ITR 460 (Bom) (v). Chokshi Metal Refinery vs. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 63 (Guj.); (vi). CIT vs. Shri. Someshwar Sahakari Karkhana Ltd. [1989]177 ITR 443 (B…

Dy CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Navi Mumbai

ITA 7672/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Dcit -15(2)(1) M/S Hexaware Technologies 3Rd Floor, Room No. 357, Vs. Ltd., Unit No. 152, Millennium Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Business Park, Ttc, Marine Lines, Industrial Area, Mahape, Mumbai – 400 020 Navi Mumbai – 400 710

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 288Section 80J

…ed on following decisions: “1) M/s Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. (ITA 3808 of 2010) Bombay HC 2) Jute Corporation of India Limited v. CIT (187ITR 688) SC 3) CIT v. Ramco International (221 CTR 491 )(Punjab& Haryana HC) 4) Emerson Network Power Ind (27 SOT 593)(Mumbai Tribunal) 5) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd v. DCIT (15 SOT 252))(Mumbai Tribunal” In view of the above discussion I hold that the AO is bound to assess the correct income and for this purpose, the AO may grant reliefs / refunds suomoto or can do so on being pointed out by the assessee in the course of assessment proceedings. In, my opinion d…

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1172/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd…….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….……...Appellant 41, Chowringhee Road Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aaecs 0445 G] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Kolkata……....................…….…..............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pankaj Parakh, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 24Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 15Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 5, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 23/02/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. We Have Heard Shri Pankaj Parekh, Fca, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee & Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit D/R On Behalf Of The Revenue. On Careful Consideration Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Perusal Of The Papers On Record, Orders Of The Authorities Below As Well As Case Law Cited, We Hold As Follows:-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 5

…ating entire contract amount as accrued on submission of bills on completion of work - Held, yes” 5. The decision of the ITAT Mumbai ‘H’ Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 27 SOT 593 (MUM.) relied upon by the ld. D/R is not applicable to the facts of the case, for the reason that, what was considered by the Bench was performance bank guarantee and not retention money as in the case of the assessee company. Even otherwise, we are bound by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Incom…

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1171/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd…….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….……...Appellant 41, Chowringhee Road Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aaecs 0445 G] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Kolkata……....................…….…..............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pankaj Parakh, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 24Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 15Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 5, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 23/02/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. We Have Heard Shri Pankaj Parekh, Fca, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee & Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit D/R On Behalf Of The Revenue. On Careful Consideration Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Perusal Of The Papers On Record, Orders Of The Authorities Below As Well As Case Law Cited, We Hold As Follows:-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 5

…ating entire contract amount as accrued on submission of bills on completion of work - Held, yes” 5. The decision of the ITAT Mumbai ‘H’ Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 27 SOT 593 (MUM.) relied upon by the ld. D/R is not applicable to the facts of the case, for the reason that, what was considered by the Bench was performance bank guarantee and not retention money as in the case of the assessee company. Even otherwise, we are bound by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Incom…

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1170/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd…….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….……...Appellant 41, Chowringhee Road Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aaecs 0445 G] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Kolkata……....................…….…..............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pankaj Parakh, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 24Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 15Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 5, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 23/02/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. We Have Heard Shri Pankaj Parekh, Fca, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee & Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit D/R On Behalf Of The Revenue. On Careful Consideration Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Perusal Of The Papers On Record, Orders Of The Authorities Below As Well As Case Law Cited, We Hold As Follows:-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 5

…ating entire contract amount as accrued on submission of bills on completion of work - Held, yes” 5. The decision of the ITAT Mumbai ‘H’ Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 27 SOT 593 (MUM.) relied upon by the ld. D/R is not applicable to the facts of the case, for the reason that, what was considered by the Bench was performance bank guarantee and not retention money as in the case of the assessee company. Even otherwise, we are bound by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Incom…

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1169/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd…….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….……...Appellant 41, Chowringhee Road Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aaecs 0445 G] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Kolkata……....................…….…..............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pankaj Parakh, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 24Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 15Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 5, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 23/02/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. We Have Heard Shri Pankaj Parekh, Fca, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee & Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit D/R On Behalf Of The Revenue. On Careful Consideration Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Perusal Of The Papers On Record, Orders Of The Authorities Below As Well As Case Law Cited, We Hold As Follows:-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 5

…ating entire contract amount as accrued on submission of bills on completion of work - Held, yes” 5. The decision of the ITAT Mumbai ‘H’ Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 27 SOT 593 (MUM.) relied upon by the ld. D/R is not applicable to the facts of the case, for the reason that, what was considered by the Bench was performance bank guarantee and not retention money as in the case of the assessee company. Even otherwise, we are bound by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Incom…

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Commtel Networks P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4872/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

…learned DR that retention money was duly received by the assessee against the bank guarantee, therefore, CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the same. Reliance was placed on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in case of Emerson Network Power India Pvt. Ltd., 27 SOT 593, wherein it was held that retention money accrued in the year the work is completed, accordingly the same is liable to tax in the very same year. 10. Learned DR further invited our attention to the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd., 286 ITR 596, by relying on which, the CIT(A) has deleted the addition. Lear…

Haldia Petrochemicals Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 2114/KOL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115JSection 32

…em. While deciding the issue as above, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered its earlier decision in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd.. Vs. CIT reported in 187 ITR 688 (SC). 19. In the case of Emerson Network Power India Ltd. Vs. ACIT reported in 27 SOT 593 (BOM), the Hon'ble Bombay ITAT has held as under: "Business expenditure'- Allowability - Claim made at the time of assessment - Claim not made in original return nor made by way of valid revised return but made in the course of assessment - A.O was obliged to give due relief to assessee or entertain its claims if admissible as per law even through…

Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

What is Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax authority for?

Also referred to as

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Emerson Network Power India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

ACIT, CC - I (2), Chennai vs. M/S. Balaji Hotels & Enterprises Ltd., Chennai

ACIT, CC - I (2), Chennai vs. M/S. Balaji Hotels & Enterprises Ltd., Chennai

ACIT, CC - I (2), Chennai vs. M/S. Balaji Hotels & Enterprises Ltd., Chennai

M/S Bellary Iron-Ores Private Limited, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

M/S Bellary Iron-Ores Pvt Ltd, Bellary vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Hospet

Bsr Infratech India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

ACIT, Ncc - 11 (1), Chennai vs. Shri Anil Kumar Shantichand Mehta, Chennai

Dy CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Navi Mumbai

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Commtel Networks P.Ltd, Mumbai

Haldia Petrochemicals Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(4), Kolkata