What is Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

An adverse inference cannot be drawn against an assessee based on a document found with a third party during a search, as possession is only attributable to the searched person. An addition to income based solely on an undated, unsigned seized document, without further corroborative evidence or inquiry, is not sustainable.

How many judgments cite Ltd. v. DCIT?

123 judgments on BharatTax cite Ltd. v. DCIT (22 SOT 7), spanning 2010 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153C, Section 131, Section 132(4), Section 292C, Section 132(4A), Section 271AAB.

Ltd. v. DCIT (22 SOT 7)

Steria India Ltd., Noida vs. Addl.CIT, Speciaql Range-8, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 3992/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…ndia Ltd: ITA No. - 756/Del/2009 dated 03.08.2015 (Del) Perfect Circle India Ltd v. DCIT: ITA No. - 7241/Mum/2012 dated 27.03.2015 (Mum) DCIT vs. Kotak Mahindra Investment Ltd: 59 SOT 4 - (Mum) Quality Engineering & Software Technologies (P.) - Ltd. vs. DCIT: 152 ITD 320 ACIT vs. Sri Ramalingeswara Rice & Oil Mill: 162 - ITD 696 (Visakhapatnam) Inventurus Knowledge Services (P.) Ltd. vs. Income - Tax Officer: 45 ITR(T) 57 (Mum) (xiii) Having regard to the aforesaid settled legal position, loss or gain arising on trading account due to exchange rate fluctuation is, in our respectful submission, to be treated on r…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 2619/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2004-05 Dcit, Vs. Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd., Circle-11(1), Ernst & Young Tower, New Delhi. B-26, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi. Pan Aabce0207H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.D. Kapila, Advocate Shri R.R. Maurya, Advocate Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit- Dr Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR

…able in India as tax treaty provisions override the provisions of domestic tax laws. Here the reliance may be placed on the judgments of Invensys Systems Inc. (AAR 796 of 2009), Cushman 8s Wakefield(s) Pte Ltd (AAR 757 of 2007) and Raymonds Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai, 80 TTJ 120). ■ Further, in the absence of permanent establishment of ExxonMobil Asia Pacific Pte Ltd., Singapore as observed form the CA certificates dated 19 March 2004 obtained from Suni Nutan & Co., Chartered Accountants, such payment of external allocation will not be subject to tax under Article 7 of the Indo-Singapore tax treaty as business income. "…

Seema Jain, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4905/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 292

…on 06.03.2014. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that the assumption of the jurisdiction by the AO in the instant case is not in accordance with law since no mandatory notice u/s. 153 C was issued by the AO. 1. DLF Properties (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 60 SOT 88 (Delhi-Trib.) 2. Pavitra Realcon (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2017] 87 taxmann.com 142 (Delhi-Trib.) 8. The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that this case was selected for scrutiny on 28.07.2012 through CASS and notice u/s. 143 (2) was issued on 06.08.2013 which was duly served on the assessee on 08.08.2013. He submitted that it is a case of scrutiny an…

Perfect Accounting & Shared Services Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-11(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1119/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 37

…otice in this backdrop ITA No.1119/Kol/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 Perfect Accounting & Shared Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Wd-11(1), Kol. Page 4 that the tribunal’s co-ordinate bench decision in Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2005) 98 TTJ 565 (Del) holds hat an assessee’s expenditure incurred on staff welfare are allowable a business expenditure u/s. 37 of the Act. We express our agreement with the same and hold that the learned lower authorities have erred disallowing assessee’s impugned claim. The Assessing Officer is directed to delete the staff welfare expenses disallowance of ₹5,4…

M/S at & T Global Betwork Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 4882/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2008-09] At &T Global Network Services [India] Vs. The Dy. C.I.T Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle Circle - 2 (1) 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L [A.Y 2008-09] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. At &T Global Network Services Circle 2(1) [India] Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Adv Ms. Chinu Bhasin, Ca Department By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 153Section 234B

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-2’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2008-09] AT &T Global Network Services [India] Vs. The Dy. C.I.T Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle Circle - 2 (1) 3rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon PAN: AAFCA 8810 L [A.Y 2008-09] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. AT &T Global Network Services Circle 2(1) [India] Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle 3rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon PAN: AAFCA 8810 L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Adv Ms. Chinu Bhasin, CA Department…

M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda

ITA 799/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R

Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A). 3. The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) reiterated the submission as placed before the AO and relied upon the following judgment. 1) Bharat heavy electrical Ltd Vs. DCIT reported in 98 TTJ 565. ITA No.4565/Ahd/2007 and 4 Other appeals(By Revenue) & 80/Ahd/2008 and 7 Other appeals (By Assessee ) Asstt. Yeasr 2004-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09, 09-10 6 2) CIT VS Bharat Petroleum Corporation LTD reported in 252 ITR 43. 3.1 The Ld.CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition as made by AO by observing that…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Nabros Pharma Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 788/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R

Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A). 3. The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) reiterated the submission as placed before the AO and relied upon the following judgment. 1) Bharat heavy electrical Ltd Vs. DCIT reported in 98 TTJ 565. ITA No.4565/Ahd/2007 and 4 Other appeals(By Revenue) & 80/Ahd/2008 and 7 Other appeals (By Assessee ) Asstt. Yeasr 2004-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09, 09-10 6 2) CIT VS Bharat Petroleum Corporation LTD reported in 252 ITR 43. 3.1 The Ld.CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition as made by AO by observing that…

The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Vadodara

ITA 551/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R

Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A). 3. The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) reiterated the submission as placed before the AO and relied upon the following judgment. 1) Bharat heavy electrical Ltd Vs. DCIT reported in 98 TTJ 565. ITA No.4565/Ahd/2007 and 4 Other appeals(By Revenue) & 80/Ahd/2008 and 7 Other appeals (By Assessee ) Asstt. Yeasr 2004-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09, 09-10 6 2) CIT VS Bharat Petroleum Corporation LTD reported in 252 ITR 43. 3.1 The Ld.CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition as made by AO by observing that…

M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(2), (Tpo), Baroda

ITA 2061/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R

Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A). 3. The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) reiterated the submission as placed before the AO and relied upon the following judgment. 1) Bharat heavy electrical Ltd Vs. DCIT reported in 98 TTJ 565. ITA No.4565/Ahd/2007 and 4 Other appeals(By Revenue) & 80/Ahd/2008 and 7 Other appeals (By Assessee ) Asstt. Yeasr 2004-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09, 09-10 6 2) CIT VS Bharat Petroleum Corporation LTD reported in 252 ITR 43. 3.1 The Ld.CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition as made by AO by observing that…

M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda

ITA 1197/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R

Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A). 3. The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) reiterated the submission as placed before the AO and relied upon the following judgment. 1) Bharat heavy electrical Ltd Vs. DCIT reported in 98 TTJ 565. ITA No.4565/Ahd/2007 and 4 Other appeals(By Revenue) & 80/Ahd/2008 and 7 Other appeals (By Assessee ) Asstt. Yeasr 2004-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09, 09-10 6 2) CIT VS Bharat Petroleum Corporation LTD reported in 252 ITR 43. 3.1 The Ld.CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition as made by AO by observing that…

M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Baroda vs. The CIT-I, Baroda

ITA 1453/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R

Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A). 3. The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) reiterated the submission as placed before the AO and relied upon the following judgment. 1) Bharat heavy electrical Ltd Vs. DCIT reported in 98 TTJ 565. ITA No.4565/Ahd/2007 and 4 Other appeals(By Revenue) & 80/Ahd/2008 and 7 Other appeals (By Assessee ) Asstt. Yeasr 2004-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09, 09-10 6 2) CIT VS Bharat Petroleum Corporation LTD reported in 252 ITR 43. 3.1 The Ld.CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition as made by AO by observing that…