Patil Engineering Ltd. v. DCIT

84 TTJ 666Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#6256 most cited
19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Judgments citing Patil Engineering Ltd. v. DCIT

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2202/AHD/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2201/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1499/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2917/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2916/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2706/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1281/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2765/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2334/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3126/AHD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1966/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT.,(OSD)CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1385/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 442/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 441/AHD/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT., RANGE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3254/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 722/AHD/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2489/AHD/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 118/AHD/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…s Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 13 the appellant. It is seen that in the earlier years, appellant was held by this office to be 'developer' and eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) by placing reliance on the decision of Patil Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT 84 TTJ 666 (Mumbai). However as on the date of passing of the said orders, the benefit of the Third Member decision cited at 126 TTJ 577 discussed below was not available. In this decision, the Mumbai Tribunal elaborately discussed the newly inserted Explanation below 80-IA(13) (by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-04-2010) and overruled the decision ci…