Mrs v. Chandra (245 ITR 610)

M/S. BAIN & COMPANY INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3541/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Maimun Alam, Sr. DR

…wing to inadvertence no provision was made and claimed in assessment year 2009-10 the same cannot be made the basis for adjudication in assessment year 2010-11. 8. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mrs. V Chandra reported in 245 ITR 610 he submitted that there is no estoppel against statute. Further the provision made for assessment year 2010-11 has been reversed in assessment year 2011-12 and therefore any disallowance made will result in double taxation. He submitted that the assessee prepares its financial statements in accordance with the generally accepted accounting princi…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S FERN HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals filed by revenue for Assessment Year

ITA 3682/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt Beena A Pillaiacit Vs. M/S Ranbaxy Health Care P Circle-15(1) Ltd. C.R.Building, I.P.Estate (Now M/S Fern Healthcare New Delhi P Ltd.) S-137, 2Nd Floor Greater Kailash Ii New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs. M/S Fern Healthcare P Ltd. Circle-15(1) S-137, 2Nd Floor C.R.Building, I.P.Estate Greater Kailash Ii New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccr3509E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.Deepali Chandra, CIT, D.R

Section 10Section 14Section 14A

…Maxopp Investments Ltd versus CIT reported in (2018) 91 taxman.com 154. 7. In the rejoinder, Ld.Counsel submitted that there is no estoppel against statute, by placing reliance upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mrs V Chandra reported in 245 ITR 610(Del, he submitted that above defensive argument has been raised at this juncture, at the outset to maintain status quo and not to seek any additional relief. Ld.Counsel placed reliance upon decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of B.R Bamsi vs. CIT reported in 83 ITR 223, wherein a similar situation arose before Hon’ble Court. 8. We have…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RANBAXY HEALTH CARE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeals filed by revenue for Assessment Year

ITA 3108/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt Beena A Pillaiacit Vs. M/S Ranbaxy Health Care P Circle-15(1) Ltd. C.R.Building, I.P.Estate (Now M/S Fern Healthcare New Delhi P Ltd.) S-137, 2Nd Floor Greater Kailash Ii New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs. M/S Fern Healthcare P Ltd. Circle-15(1) S-137, 2Nd Floor C.R.Building, I.P.Estate Greater Kailash Ii New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccr3509E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.Deepali Chandra, CIT, D.R

Section 10Section 14Section 14A

…Maxopp Investments Ltd versus CIT reported in (2018) 91 taxman.com 154. 7. In the rejoinder, Ld.Counsel submitted that there is no estoppel against statute, by placing reliance upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mrs V Chandra reported in 245 ITR 610(Del, he submitted that above defensive argument has been raised at this juncture, at the outset to maintain status quo and not to seek any additional relief. Ld.Counsel placed reliance upon decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of B.R Bamsi vs. CIT reported in 83 ITR 223, wherein a similar situation arose before Hon’ble Court. 8. We have…

THE BALASORE BHADRAK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,BALASORE vs. JCIT, BALASORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 417/CTK/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

For Appellant: Written submissionFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 2(9)Section 263Section 80Section 80P(4)

…Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2009-2010 The Balasore Bhadrak Vs. JCIT, Balasore Range, Central Co-op.Bank Ltd., Balasore O.T.Road, Balasore. PAN/GIR No.AAAAT 2620 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Written submission Revenue by : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR Date of Hearing : 05/10/ 2017 Date of Pronouncement : 05/10/ 2017 O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)- Cuttack dated 15.4.2…

M/S. VAILDOR CAPITAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, GURGAON

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

ITA 1979/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. S.D. Kapila, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. T.M. Shivakumar, CIT/DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 92C

…ics Systems Ltd.” In support of admission of additional ground, the appellant relied upon the following case laws : (i). Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC) (ii). CWT vs. Mettles (P) Ltd.. 156 ITR 569 (Del.) (iii). CIT vs. Mrs. V. Chandra, 245 ITR 610 (Del.) (iv). DIT(Inv.) vs. Pooran Mall & Sons, 96 ITR 390 (SC) (v). PV Doshi vs. CIT, 113 ITR 22 (Guj) (vi). CIT vs. Continental Commercial Corp. , 110 ITR 170 (Mad) (vii). Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala, 91 ITR 18 (SC) (viii). CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Textile Mills, 66 ITR 710 (SC) (ix). NTPC vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) (x). Stream…

SAIC INDIA PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 6464/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri N.K. Saini

For Appellant: S/Shri S.D. Kapila, R.R. MauryaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Jain, CIT DR

Section 40Section 92C

…not be estopped to seek exclusion of the comparables from the final list of comparables and relied upon the judgment cited as (i) Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT – 82 ITR 363; (ii) CWT vs. Meattles (P_ Ltd. – 156 ITR 569; (iii) CIT vs. Mrs. V. Chandra – 245 ITR 610; (iv) Director of 10 ITA No.6464/Del./2012 Inspection of Income-tax (Inv.) vs. Pooran Mall & Sons – 96 ITR 390; (v) PV Doshi vs. CIT – 113 ITR 22 (Guj.). 13. However, on the other hand, ld. DR opposed the application on the grounds inter alia that the assessee cannot be allowed to para-drop favourable comparables and exclude unfavourable ones a…

Mrs v. Chandra