PCIT v. Quest Investment Advisors (P.) Ltd.

409 ITR 545High Court2018#1364 most cited

What is PCIT v. Quest Investment Advisors (P.) Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer is bound by the rule of consistency and cannot take a contrary or different stand on an issue in a subsequent assessment year if the factual position remains identical to previous years where a deduction was allowed.

84

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Quest Investment Advisors · 409 ITR 545 · rule of consistency · consistent view · Assessing Officer · contrary stand · identical factual position · deduction allowed · subsequent assessment year · section 143(3) · section 263

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 263Section 31(1)Section 32(1)(iii)Section 270ASection 32Section 10B

Issues it is cited on

section 31(1)opening wdvtransferor companycomparable uncontrolled price methodsection 92c(1)depreciation on goodwillblock of assetssection 31written down valueslump salerevision under section 263reference to tpo

Judgments citing PCIT v. Quest Investment Advisors (P.) Ltd.

M/S. Sogefi Engine Systems India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1697/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1696 to 1698/Bang/2019, 2089/Bang/2019 & 757/Bang/2016 Assessment years : 2013-14 to 2016-17 & 2012-13 Sogefi Engine Systems India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited of Income Tax, [formerly Sogefi-MNR Engine Circle 6(1)(2), Systems India Pvt. Ltd.], Bangalore. 54/3/B, Ejipura Main Road, Vivek Nagar, Bangalore – 560 047. PAN: AAFCM 6821K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Venkatesh Kumar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Add…

M/S. Sogefi Engine Systems India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1696/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1696 to 1698/Bang/2019, 2089/Bang/2019 & 757/Bang/2016 Assessment years : 2013-14 to 2016-17 & 2012-13 Sogefi Engine Systems India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited of Income Tax, [formerly Sogefi-MNR Engine Circle 6(1)(2), Systems India Pvt. Ltd.], Bangalore. 54/3/B, Ejipura Main Road, Vivek Nagar, Bangalore – 560 047. PAN: AAFCM 6821K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Venkatesh Kumar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Add…

M/S Sogefi Mnr Filtration India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 757/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1696 to 1698/Bang/2019, 2089/Bang/2019 & 757/Bang/2016 Assessment years : 2013-14 to 2016-17 & 2012-13 Sogefi Engine Systems India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited of Income Tax, [formerly Sogefi-MNR Engine Circle 6(1)(2), Systems India Pvt. Ltd.], Bangalore. 54/3/B, Ejipura Main Road, Vivek Nagar, Bangalore – 560 047. PAN: AAFCM 6821K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Venkatesh Kumar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Add…

DCIT (E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4065/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2021AY 2011-12
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 154Section 25

…submitted that section 145(1) of the Act does not provide any hindrance to the system of accounting in this regard being followed by the assessee. In this regard he placed reliance upon the following case laws :- • PCIT Vs. Quest Investment Advisors (P) Ltd. (409 ITR 545) • CIT Vs. Nagri Mills Co. Ltd. (33 ITR 681) 5 Aditya Birla Foundation • CIT Vs. Ganga Charity Trust Fund (162 ITR 612) • DCIT Vs. M/s. G.D. Birla Medical Research & Education Foundation (ITA No. 4348/Mum/2018) 11. We have carefully considered the submission and perused the record. We note that the assessee is a trust. It is undisputed that the…

Lubrizol India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu-2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6393/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं. 6393/मुं/2017 (िन. व. 2013-14) M/S Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. 9/3, Thane Belapur Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. Pan: Aaacl 0126H ...... अपीलाथ- /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Dcit, Ltu-2, 29Th Floor, Centre No.1, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parede, Mumbai 400005 ..... .ितवाद0/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234C

…g identical. The said proposition is well supported by M/s. Lubrizol India Private Limited Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 8 the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT v/s. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2018] 409 ITR 545 wherein it has been held that when a principle has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years as well as in subsequent years then the Revenue is bound by it unless there is a change in law or change in facts therein, which change has to be pointed out in the assessment Order. In so doing the jurisdictional High Court followed the judgment of t…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…Kar) CIT v. Excel Industries, 358 ITR 295 (SC) CIT v. Plaza Hotels (P) Ltd. 107 taxmann.com 287 (Bom) BSNL v. UOI, 3 SCC 1 CIT v. Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. (P&H) CIT v. JPS Associates, 228 Taxman 367 Pr. CIT v. Quest Investment Advisors (P) Ltd. 409 ITR 545 (Bom) 74. The ld. AR further submitted that trading in F&O derivative being non- speculative transaction any loss arising from the said trading is entitled for set off against the income from another source under the same head. A reference is made to section 70 which provides set off of loss from one source against income from another source und…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…Kar) CIT v. Excel Industries, 358 ITR 295 (SC) CIT v. Plaza Hotels (P) Ltd. 107 taxmann.com 287 (Bom) BSNL v. UOI, 3 SCC 1 CIT v. Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. (P&H) CIT v. JPS Associates, 228 Taxman 367 Pr. CIT v. Quest Investment Advisors (P) Ltd. 409 ITR 545 (Bom) 74. The ld. AR further submitted that trading in F&O derivative being non- speculative transaction any loss arising from the said trading is entitled for set off against the income from another source under the same head. A reference is made to section 70 which provides set off of loss from one source against income from another source und…

The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(2), Vadodara vs. M/S. Web Gazer Software Company, Vadodara

ITA 1559/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 10ASection 10BSection 14

…nds negative as held by various court of law that the principle of consistency must prevail. In this respect we find support and guidance from the order of the Hon’ble Bombay High court in case of PCIT vs. Quest Investment Advisors (P) Ltd. reported in [2018] 409 ITR 545 [Bom] where it was held as under: The principle accepted by the revenue for 10 earlier years and 4 subsequent years to the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 was that the entire expenditure is to be allowed against business income and no expenditure is to be allocated to capital gains. Once this principle was accepted and consistency applied a…

NA vs. Ari Oil Products P. Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 6576/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 8665/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 6576/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 8553/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Navsari Oil Products Pvt.Ltd. Ito-Cc 7(1)(3) बनाम C/O Vvf Limited, Plot No.109 Aaykar Bhavan / Vs. Sion (East), Mumbai-400 025 Mumbai – 400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacn-1387-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal-Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Tharian Oommen-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 01/02/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 09/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 25FSection 57Section 80

…able to income tax proceedings but the rule of consistency would demand that accepted position is not disturbed on identical facts as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT v/s. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2018] 409 ITR 545 wherein it has been held that when a principle has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years as well as in subsequent years then the Revenue is bound by it unless there is a change in law or change in facts therein, which change has to be pointed out in the assessment Order. In so doing the jurisdictional High Court followed the judgment of t…

J.R.D Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3738/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2014-15
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 263

…the other, and the parties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. In the case of PCIT v. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt Ltd. [(2018) 419 ITR 545 (Bom.)], referring to this judgment and taking note of subsequent legal developments, Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has, inter alia, observed as follows: 7. We note that the impugned order of the Tribunal records the fact that the Revenue Authorities have consistently over the years i.e. for the 10 years years prior to Assessment Years 2007-0…

Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3737/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2014-15
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 263

…the other, and the parties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. In the case of PCIT v. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt Ltd. [(2018) 419 ITR 545 (Bom.)], referring to this judgment and taking note of subsequent legal developments, Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has, inter alia, observed as follows: 7. We note that the impugned order of the Tribunal records the fact that the Revenue Authorities have consistently over the years i.e. for the 10 years years prior to Assessment Years 2007-0…

Lubrizol India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu-2, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 6667/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.882/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.396/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6667/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S. Lubrizol India Private Limited The Asstt. Commissioner Of Plant: 9/3, Thane Belapur Road Income Tax -Ltu बनाम/ Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400 705 29Th Floor, Centre No.1 Vs. Maharashtra World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cin: U23201Mh1966Ptc013538 Mumbai-400 005. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacl-0126- H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala-Ld. Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(1)

…ing identical. The said proposition is well supported by M/s. Lubrizol India Private Limited Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT v/s. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2018] 409 ITR 545 wherein it has been held that when a principle has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years as well as in subsequent years then the Revenue is bound by it unless there is a change in law or change in facts therein, which change has to be pointed out in the assessment Order. In so doing the jurisdictional High Court followed the judgment of t…

Lubrizol India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 396/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.882/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.396/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6667/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S. Lubrizol India Private Limited The Asstt. Commissioner Of Plant: 9/3, Thane Belapur Road Income Tax -Ltu बनाम/ Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400 705 29Th Floor, Centre No.1 Vs. Maharashtra World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cin: U23201Mh1966Ptc013538 Mumbai-400 005. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacl-0126- H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala-Ld. Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(1)

…ing identical. The said proposition is well supported by M/s. Lubrizol India Private Limited Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT v/s. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2018] 409 ITR 545 wherein it has been held that when a principle has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years as well as in subsequent years then the Revenue is bound by it unless there is a change in law or change in facts therein, which change has to be pointed out in the assessment Order. In so doing the jurisdictional High Court followed the judgment of t…

Lubrizol India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 882/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.882/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.396/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6667/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S. Lubrizol India Private Limited The Asstt. Commissioner Of Plant: 9/3, Thane Belapur Road Income Tax -Ltu बनाम/ Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400 705 29Th Floor, Centre No.1 Vs. Maharashtra World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cin: U23201Mh1966Ptc013538 Mumbai-400 005. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacl-0126- H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala-Ld. Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(1)

…ing identical. The said proposition is well supported by M/s. Lubrizol India Private Limited Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT v/s. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2018] 409 ITR 545 wherein it has been held that when a principle has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years as well as in subsequent years then the Revenue is bound by it unless there is a change in law or change in facts therein, which change has to be pointed out in the assessment Order. In so doing the jurisdictional High Court followed the judgment of t…

DCIT (Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Education and Deveopment Trust, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1535/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2020AY 2012-13
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

…in the case of RadhasoamiSatsang (supra), being a conditional and caveated principle, learned counsel submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has dealt with that aspect of the matter, in a rather recent case of PCIT Vs Quest Investment Advisors Pvt Ltd [(2018) 419 ITR 545 (Bom)], noted similar objection of the revenue before them, but relying on a subsequent judgment in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Union of India ITA Nos 1423, 1424 and 1535/Mum/2018 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 34 of 51 [2006] 282 ITR 273 (SC)] rejected the same. We were taken through relevant observations in these judi…

Tata Education and Deveopment Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT(Exp)-2(1) Now Assessed by DCIT (Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1424/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2020AY 2012-13
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

…in the case of RadhasoamiSatsang (supra), being a conditional and caveated principle, learned counsel submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has dealt with that aspect of the matter, in a rather recent case of PCIT Vs Quest Investment Advisors Pvt Ltd [(2018) 419 ITR 545 (Bom)], noted similar objection of the revenue before them, but relying on a subsequent judgment in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Union of India ITA Nos 1423, 1424 and 1535/Mum/2018 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 34 of 51 [2006] 282 ITR 273 (SC)] rejected the same. We were taken through relevant observations in these judi…

Tata Education and Deveopment Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT(Exp)-2(1) Now Assessed by DCIT (Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1423/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2020AY 2011-12
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

…in the case of RadhasoamiSatsang (supra), being a conditional and caveated principle, learned counsel submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has dealt with that aspect of the matter, in a rather recent case of PCIT Vs Quest Investment Advisors Pvt Ltd [(2018) 419 ITR 545 (Bom)], noted similar objection of the revenue before them, but relying on a subsequent judgment in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Union of India ITA Nos 1423, 1424 and 1535/Mum/2018 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 34 of 51 [2006] 282 ITR 273 (SC)] rejected the same. We were taken through relevant observations in these judi…

Bodal Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1, Ahmedabad

ITA 2249/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 32Section 43(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sr. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant Respondent 1. 2007-08 Bodal Chemicals The Addl. CIT, Ltd., Range – 1, Plot No. 123/124, Ahmedabad. Phase –I, GIDC, Vatva, Ahmedabad. 2. 2008-09 --do-- --do-- Assessee by : Shri M. K. Patel, A.R. Revenue by : Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R. Sr. ITA and IT(SS) No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant Respondent 1. 2007-08 The Addl. CIT, Bodal Range – 1, Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad. 2. 2009-10 Bodal Chemicals The A…

The ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Bodal Chemical Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 597/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 32Section 43(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sr. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant Respondent 1. 2007-08 Bodal Chemicals The Addl. CIT, Ltd., Range – 1, Plot No. 123/124, Ahmedabad. Phase –I, GIDC, Vatva, Ahmedabad. 2. 2008-09 --do-- --do-- Assessee by : Shri M. K. Patel, A.R. Revenue by : Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R. Sr. ITA and IT(SS) No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant Respondent 1. 2007-08 The Addl. CIT, Bodal Range – 1, Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad. 2. 2009-10 Bodal Chemicals The A…

M/S. Bodal Chemical Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Add.CIT., Range-1, Ahmedabad

ITA 42/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 32Section 43(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sr. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant Respondent 1. 2007-08 Bodal Chemicals The Addl. CIT, Ltd., Range – 1, Plot No. 123/124, Ahmedabad. Phase –I, GIDC, Vatva, Ahmedabad. 2. 2008-09 --do-- --do-- Assessee by : Shri M. K. Patel, A.R. Revenue by : Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R. Sr. ITA and IT(SS) No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant Respondent 1. 2007-08 The Addl. CIT, Bodal Range – 1, Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad. 2. 2009-10 Bodal Chemicals The A…