Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

25 SOT 359Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#20187 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LIMITED,BURLA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 141/CTK/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.141/Ctk/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur Jagruti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. : Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Poddar, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 29/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, Dated 21.04.2020 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016, On The Following Grounds :- 1. That The Notice Issued & Order Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sambalpur (Pr. Cit) Is Unjustified, Arbitrary, Excessive, Contrary To Evidences & Bad In Law. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Pr. Cit Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Assuming Jurisdiction In Issuing The Notice & Passing The Order U/S.263 Of The Act, More So When The Assessment Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue. 3. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Pr. Cit Has Further Erred In Law & In Facts In Assuming Jurisdiction In Issuing The Notice & Passing The Order U/S.263 Of The Act, As The Subject Matter Of Proceedings U/S.263 Of The Act Were Duly Considered By The Ld. Assessing Officer During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & The Assessment Order Was Passed After Making All The Enquiries & Verification & With Due Application Of Mind.

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Poddar, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

…isallowance. Similarly, "erroneous judgement" means "one rendered according to course and practice of court, but contrary to law, upon mistaken view of law; or upon erroneous application of legal principles" - Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2008] 25 SOT 359 (Mum.)An order cannot be termed as erroneous unless it is not in accordance with law. If the AO is acting in accordance with law makes a certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous simply because certain expenditure would have been disallowed. As observed by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Dawjee Dadabhoy and Co. vs. S.…

VIRMATI SOFTWARE & TELECOMMUNICATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1135/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1135/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Virmati Software & Telecommunication D.C.I.T, Limited, Vs. Cirle-4(1)(2) A-2/3, Arjun Tower, Ahmedabad. Satellite Road, Satellite, Ahmedabad-380 015. Pan: Aaacv6480G

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Deelip Kumar, Sr.D.R

Section 234ASection 271Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 91

…the assessee should be given relief for the entire amount of tax paid in the foreign country. The learned AR in support of his contention placed his reliance on the order of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd versus DCIT reported in 25 SOT 359. Asstt. Year 2012-13 8 The learned AR alternatively also contended that if the tax credit is not allowed to the assessee then the same should be allowed as an expense under section 37(1) of the Act. The learned AR in support of his contention relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Infrastructure Ltd versus CIT…

ACC LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 977/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.977 & 978/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2013–14 & 2014–15) ACC Limited Cement House 121, M.K. Road ……………. Appellant Mumbai 400 020 PAN – AAACT1507C v/s Asstt. Commissioner of ……………. Respondent Income Tax (LTU)–1, Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Yogesh Thar a/w Shri Hardik Nirmal Revenue by : Shri Anadi Varma Date of Hearing – 03.09.2019 Date of Order – 28.11.2019 O R D E R PER BENCH Aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging two separate ord…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

ITA No.1329/K/08

ITA 197/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: S/Shri D.S Damle, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjana, CIT, ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…91 from the Indian Income tax payable. We are in agreement with the argument of the Learned AR in this regard and also on the reliance placed on the co-ordinate bench decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Construction Co Ltd vs CIT reported in 25 SOT 359 (Mum ITAT) in favour of the assessee, wherein it was held :- “6.4 In the light of the above discussion, we consider the facts of the case under consideration. There is no dispute that the assessee is entitled to relief under section 91 of the Act. The scheme of the Act is that section 115JB is applicable wherein the case of an assessee, being a…