Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

330 ITR 243High Court2011#2338 most cited

What is Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT authority for?

An order cannot be amended under Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, if it involves debatable issues of fact or law. The power under this section is restricted to rectifying mistakes apparent from the record.

49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT · section 254(2) · section 154 · debatable issues · mistake apparent from record · rectification of order · amendment by Tribunal · scope of rectification power · Full Bench decision · Delhi High Court

Issues it is cited on

section 234e(1)section 200a(1)(c)section 254(2)section 200a(1)section 200(3)section 200asection 234esection 254(1)section 200tax deducted at sourcesection 20section 234

Judgments citing Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

M/S St. Alphonsa Timbers & Traders (Pvt) Ltd, Maradu vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kochi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 888/COCH/2022[QUARTER-II 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2023

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234E

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 (SC), is misplaced. The same stand pursued to find as ousting debatable issues from t…

M/S St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders (Pvt) Ltd, Maradu vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kochi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 887/COCH/2022[QUARTER-IV 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2023

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234E

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 (SC), is misplaced. The same stand pursued to find as ousting debatable issues from t…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Udiyankulangara Branch, Thiruvananthapuram vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Trivandrum, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 835/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Omalloor Branch, Pathanamthitta vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Trivandrum, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 834/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Omalloor Branch, Pathanamthitta vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Trivandrum, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 833/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Irulam Branch, Wayanad vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 832/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q,Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Irulam Branch, Wayanad vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 831/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Irulam Branch, Wayanad vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 830/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Irulam Branch, Wayanad vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 829/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Ulliyeri Branch, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 828/COCH/2022[2013-2014(27Q,Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Ulliyeri Branch, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 826/COCH/2022[2013-2014 (24Q, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Ulliyeri Branch, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 825/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Ulliyeri Branch, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 824/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Ulliyeri Branch, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 823/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q,Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Ulliyeri Branch, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 822/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Othukkungal Branch, Malappuram vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 821/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Othukkungal Branch, Malappuram vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 820/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Irumbuzhi Branch, Malappuram vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 819/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Irumbuzhi Branch, Malappuram vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 818/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…

Kerala Gramin Bank, Irumbuzhi Branch, Malappuram vs. The ITO Ward TDS, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 817/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q,Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Written Submissions (through S/Sh. Pratik Sadrani, HardikFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

…ontext may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Aruna Luthra [2001] 252 ITR 76 (P&H)(FB). We are, therefore, not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A), who has distinguished the former decision as well as in Laxmndas Bhatia Hingwala Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB), cited before him by the assessee, as being in respect of the power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. His reliance for the purpose on the decision in the case of CIT v. South Indian Bank Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 304 (SC) and CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 463 6 | P a g e ITA No.797/Coch/2022 & Ors. Kerala Gramin Bank, Onchiyam Branch & Ors.…