Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 2(4), Section 2(5), Section 263, Section 32.

Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax

Q: How many judgments cite Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax?

64 judgments on BharatTax cite Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax (26 ITR 765), spanning 2009 to 2025.

26 ITR 765Supreme Court of India1954#1756 most cited

What is Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax authority for?

The definition of 'business' is of wide import, encompassing any trade, commerce, manufacture, or adventure in the nature of trade. Even a single and isolated transaction can constitute an 'adventure in the nature of trade' if it bears the clear indicia of trade, and no fixed formula can be evolved to determine the character of such isolated transactions.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,416 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills · Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax · 26 ITR 765 · SC 1954 · definition of business · adventure in the nature of trade · single isolated transaction · indicia of trade · Section 2(4) Income Tax Act · Section 2(5) Excess Profits Tax Act · scope of business income · trade character

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(4)Section 2(5)Section 263 Section 32 Section 1961 Section 2(13) of the Income Tax Act

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 208 section 10(2a)section 14a disallowance section 32(1)(iia)clarificatory amendment section 32(1)(ii)strategic investment section 92ca(1)section 144c(3)corporate guarantee additional depreciation section 57

Judgments citing Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax

M/S Jaypee Powergrid Ltd.M, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5489/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Anil Chopra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR

…d "business" is of wide import which would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up 12 Assessment year 2009-10 of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd. vs. CIT/CEPT (1958) 34 ITR 368 (SC) and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs. CEPT (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure then it can…

Sri Gopal Pandey, Garhwa vs. ITO Ward-3(5), Daltonganj

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

ITA 63/RAN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalea.Y. : 2010-2011 Sri Gopal Pandey, Vs Ito Ward-3(6), Prop: M/S Maa Shardey Daltongaj Automobiles, Soh, Panchperwa, Garwah- 822114 Pan No. : Aijpp 4436 C Respondent (Appellant) .

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Khejriwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 28

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. : 2010-2011 Sri Gopal Pandey, vs ITO Ward-3(6), Prop: M/s Maa Shardey Daltongaj Automobiles, SOH, Panchperwa, Garwah- 822114 PAN No. : AIJPP 4436 C Respondent (Appellant) . Assessee by : Shri Pankaj Khejriwal, Advocate Revenue by :Shri P.K.Mondal, JCIT Date of Hearing : 29.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 30.05.2018 O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Ranchi, dated 21.12.2016 for the a…

ACIT Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai vs. S.Vinodh Kumar, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2527/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2527/Chny/2017 & C.O.No.9/Chny/2018 (Ita No.2527/Chny/2017) "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri. S. Vinodh Kumar, Income Tax, No.25, Ranganathan Avenue, Non Corporate Circle 10 (1) Kilpauk, Chennai. Chennai 600 010. [Pan Aaipv 5798G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector)

For Respondent: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate

Section 44A

…ng by the submissions of the assessee and holding that assessee was ITA No. 2527-17, CO-09-18 :- 3 -: pursuing a business activity. Reliance was placed on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills Ltd. vs. CEPT, 26 ITR 765 and M/s. Vijaya Laxmi Sugar Mills Limited vs. CIT, 191 ITR 641. Per contra, ld. Authorised Representative strongly supported 5. the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. A reading of the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appe…

ITO 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bajaj Capital Ventures P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4283/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Income Tax Officer 3(1)(2), Bajaj Capital Ventures P. Aayakar Bhavan, Room Ltd. No.666, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, 106 & 107, 10Th Floor, Bajaj Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Bhawan, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, 226, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaaca3565F

For Appellant: V Mohan, ARFor Respondent: Rajat Mittal, DR

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM Income Tax Officer 3(1)(2), Bajaj Capital Ventures P. Aayakar Bhavan, Room Ltd. No.666, 6th Floor, M.K. Road, 106 & 107, 10th Floor, Bajaj Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Bhawan, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, 226, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAACA3565F Revenue by : Rajat Mittal, DR Assessee by : V Mohan, AR Date of hearing: 25-01-2018 Date of pronouncement : 31-01-2018 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income…

DCIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Kolkata Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue (ITA No

ITA 49/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1362/Kol/2015& 49/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11& 2011-12) I.T.O Wd-2(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S Kolkata Metro Rail Corpn. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 7Th Floor, Hrbc Bhavan, 4Th& 5Th R/No.21, Kol – 69. Floor, Munshi Prem Chand Sarani, Kolkata – 700 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aadck 5313 J (Appellant) .. (Assessee) Appellantby : Shriarindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit Assesseeby :Shri Vikash Singhal. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: These Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue,Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11,Aredirected Against The Order Passed By The Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1,Kolkata,Which In Turn Arise Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2.Since These Two Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.The Revenue’S Appeal In Ita No.1362/Kol/2015, A.Y 2010-11, Is Taken As The Lead Case. 4.The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue (In Lead Case In Ita No.1362/Kol/2015, A.Y 2010-11) Are As Under:

For Appellant: ShriArindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56

…ll such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. We take support of these propositions from the judgments of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Dock Ltd. vs. CIT/CEPT (1958) 34 ITR 368 (SC) and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs. CEPT (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure then it can…

ITO, WD-2(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Kolkata Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue (ITA No

ITA 1362/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: ShriArindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56

Bsi Securities International Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6992/MUM/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2017AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Paresh SapariaFor Respondent: Ms.Pooja Swaroop

Section 50C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘F’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI Before Shri Shamim Yahya, AM & Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM ITA No.6992/Mum/2008 : Asst.Year 2003-2004 M/s.BSI Securities International Ltd. The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 34-A, Nariman Bhavan Ward 4(1)(1) 227 Nariman Point Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai – 400 021. PAN : AAACB1930D. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Paresh Saparia ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Ms.Pooja Swaroop सुनवाई क" तार"ख / घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 25.05.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 आदे…

Shri M M Creations, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 5641/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai & M. M. Creations Acit T-481A, Baljeet Nagar Circle-24(1), Behind Patel Nagar Police Station New Delhi Vs. New Delhi. Pan : Aaefm9802A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. SinghviFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 24Section 56Section 56(2)(iii)

…While laying down aforesaid general principles and summarizing legal position, Hon’ble Supreme Court considered its previous decisions, viz., (1) CEPT v. Shri Lakshmi Silk Mills Ltd. [1951] 20 ITR 451 ; (2) Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. 8 and CEPT [1954] 26 ITR 765 ; (3) CIT v. Calcutta National Bank Ltd. [1959] 37 ITR 171 ; (4) Sultan Brothers P. Ltd. v. CIT [1964] 51 ITR 353 ; (5) New Savan Sugar and Gur Refining Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1969] 74 ITR 7 and (6) CIT v. Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd. [1988] 169 ITR 597. 14. Keeping in mind aforesaid legal position, we shall now advert to facts of present case more particul…

M/S. Tata Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4894/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Accoutant Member & Shri Sanjay Gargtata Industries Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bombay House,24,Homi 2 (3) (3), Room No.555, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi 400 001 Karve Road, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaact 4058 L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas, Ar Respondent By Shri Alok Johri, Dr Date Of Hearing 22-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20-07-2016

Section 10ASection 115JSection 14ASection 36

…re related to such income cannot be allowed under section 14A of the Act.” (iii) Hon’ble ITAT considered Hon’ble Apex Court Judgements in the case of Distributors (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. 83 ITR 377 and Bengal and Assam Investors Ltd., NarainSwadeshi Weaving Mills 26 ITR 765 and Amalgamation Pvt. Ltd 226 ITR 188 at para 19 and 20 held that “19. In view of the above legal position, we are of the view that where a specific head is provided in respect of a particular income, then such income must be computed under that very head irrespective of the nature of income. In the case of a company in the business of holding sha…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Facor Power Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1011/2015HC Delhi07 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

For Appellant: Mr Zoheb Hossain for Mr Rohit MadanFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 260A

…import which would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd vs CIT & Excess Profits Tax; (1958) 34 ITR 368 (SC), and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax; (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee‟s income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure – then…

Mahagun Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4419/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. I.C.Sudhir, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Sh. Saubhagya Aggarwal, Adv. Suman Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.R. Singh, CIT, DR

Section 153A

…wide import which would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd vs CIT & Excess Profits Tax; (1958) 34 ITR 368 (SC), and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax; (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee‟s income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure - then it c…

Mahagun Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4418/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I.C.Sudhir, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Sh. Saubhagya Aggarwal, Adv. Suman Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.R. Singh, CIT, DR

Section 153A

Asst CIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed

ITA 3808/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Lalit Kumar, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anu A.G.Bhatkar (CIT-DR)For Respondent: Shri Kishor Chaudhari

Section 11

…g consultancy fees received and paid are the only accounts, which are required to be maintained and are being maintained by the assessee. The assessee in support of its case, relied upon various judgments, including – (i) Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills [(1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC)], (ii) Ashish Super Marcato v. DDI (Exemption, Ernakulam), (iii) Sri Pedda Jeeyangar Mutt v. ITO 31 ITD 324, (iv) Tolani Education Society v. DDIT (Exemptions) (2013) 351 ITR 184, (v) M/s.Queen’s Education Society v. CIT 2015 (3) TMI 619, (vi) Indian Chamber of commerce v. ITO 101 ITR 796, (vii) Divya Yog Mandir Trust v. JCIT ITA 12 ITA No.3…

CIT vs. Kjs India Pvt Ltd

The Appeal is dismissed

ITA - 1092 / 2011HC Delhi19 Sept 2011

…g activity in the year in question was simply suspended and the said manufacturing of powdered soft drink could not be construed as single activity. The Tribunal further relied upon the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of *Narayan Swadesh* –vs- *CIT*, **26 ITR 765** wherein the Supreme Court defined the expression "business" and held that business connotes some real substantial systemic and organized course of activity or a conduct with a set purpose. ITA 1092/2011 Page 3 of 4 ![](_page_3_Picture_0.jpeg) ![](_page_3_Picture_1.jpeg) In the present case, since the assessee had been doing other business ac…

CIT vs. Petronet Lng Ltd

ITA/290/2011HC Delhi17 Feb 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

…ITA Nos.290 of 2011 & 292 of 2011 Page 1 of 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.290 of 2011 & ITA No.292 of 2011 % DECISION DELIVERED ON: 17th February, 2011. + ITA No.290 of 2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX . . . Appellant through : Mr. M.P. Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel. VERSUS PETRONET LNG LTD. . . .Respondent through: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. + ITA No.292 of 2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX . . . Appellan…

CIT vs. Petronet Lng Ltd

ITA - 290 / 2011HC Delhi17 Feb 2011

…* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.290 of 2011 & ITA No.292 of 2011 % DECISION DELIVERED ON: 17th February, 2011. + ITA No.290 of 2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX . . . Appellant through : Mr. M.P. Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel. VERSUS PETRONET LNG LTD. . . .Respondent through: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. + ITA No.292 of 2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX . . . Appellant through : Mr. M.P. Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel. VERSUS PET…

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd vs. C.I.T

ITA/1261/2008HC Delhi30 Oct 2009

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 35

…ITA No. 1261/08, 1278/08, 1287/08 & 1402/08 nsk Page 1 of 16 Reportable * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No. 1261 of 2008 ITA No. 1278 of 2008 ITA No. 1287 of 2008 ITA No. 1402 of 2008 % Reserved on : September 17, 2009 Pronounced on : October 30, 2009 Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. . . . Appellant through : Mr. Ajay Vohra with Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocates VERSUS Commissioner of Income Tax . . . Respondent through : Mr. Subhash Bansal, Advocate CORAM :- THE HON‟BLE MR. JUS…

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd vs. C.I.T

Accordingly, these appeals preferred by the assessee are dismissed with costs of Rs

ITA - 1278 / 2008HC Delhi30 Oct 2009

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 35

…#### IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA No. 1278 of 2008 Ħ % Reserved on : September 17, 2009 Pronounced on: October 30, 2009 Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. ... Appellant through: Mr. Ajay Vohra with Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocates **VERSUS** Commissioner of Income Tax ... Respondent through: Mr. Subhash Bansal, Advocate **CORAM:-** لختن THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA - 1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? - 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? - 3. Whether the Judgment should…

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd vs. C.I.T

Accordingly, these appeals preferred by the assessee are dismissed with costs of Rs

ITA - 1287 / 2008HC Delhi30 Oct 2009

Section 35Section 35DSection 8

…## IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ## ITA No. 1287 of 2008 % A Reserved on : September 17, 2009 Pronounced on : October 30, 2009 Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. ... Appellant through: Mr. Ajay Vohra with Ms. Kavita Jha and .Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocates **VERSUS** Commissioner of Income Tax ... Respondent through: Mr. Subhash Bansal, Advocate **CORAM:-** **.** THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA - 1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? - 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? - 3. Whether the Judgment sh…

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA-1261/2008HC Delhi30 Oct 2009

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 35

…Reportable * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No. 1261 of 2008 ITA No. 1278 of 2008 ITA No. 1287 of 2008 ITA No. 1402 of 2008 % Reserved on : September 17, 2009 Pronounced on : October 30, 2009 Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. . . . Appellant through : Mr. Ajay Vohra with Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocates VERSUS Commissioner of Income Tax . . . Respondent through : Mr. Subhash Bansal, Advocate CORAM :- THE HON‟BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI THE HON‟BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA 1. Whe…