PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.

140 Taxmann.com 223Supreme Court of India2022#490 most cited

What is PCIT v. Wipro Ltd. authority for?

Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).

192

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,514 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Wipro Ltd · Wipro Ltd · Section 10B(8) · Section 10B · Section 80A(5) · Section 139(1) · strict interpretation · exemption provisions · claim in return of income · Chapter III · Chapter VIA · deductions

Also reported as

446 ITR 1

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 11Section 12ASection 119(2)(b)Section 139(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 10b(8)section 80j(6a)section 139(3)section 10bsection 10basection 108section 80a(5)section 80jsection 12a(1)(b)section 139(5)section 80jjaacarry forward of losses

Judgments citing PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.

M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 334/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

…o.14/PUN/2021 The ld. CIT-DR further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) had failed to take cognizance of provisions of section 139(3) r.w.s. 80 of the Act. He further relies on ratio of the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd., 446 ITR 1 (SC) drawing our attention to para 9 of the said judgement of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court (supra). 47. On the other hand, ld. AR submits that the ratio of decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Wipro Ltd. (supra) have no application to the facts of the case, as the issue before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court was regarding interpretation of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

…o.14/PUN/2021 The ld. CIT-DR further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) had failed to take cognizance of provisions of section 139(3) r.w.s. 80 of the Act. He further relies on ratio of the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd., 446 ITR 1 (SC) drawing our attention to para 9 of the said judgement of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court (supra). 47. On the other hand, ld. AR submits that the ratio of decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Wipro Ltd. (supra) have no application to the facts of the case, as the issue before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court was regarding interpretation of…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Tracks & Towers Infratech Private Limited(Part IX), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1515/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal
Section 133ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80I

…the first time in the revised return. He accordingly submitted that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in allowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. 13.1 Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of PCI and another vs Wipro Ltd. reported in 446 ITR 1 (SC), he submitted that the assessee cannot claim the deduction u/s. 80IA in the revised return when such claim was not made in the original return. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, he submitted that when the assessee is a works contractor and the company executes only contract work and is not a developer, therefore, even otherwise als…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Tracks & Towers Infratech Private Limited(Part IX), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1514/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal
Section 133ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80I

…the first time in the revised return. He accordingly submitted that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in allowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. 13.1 Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of PCI and another vs Wipro Ltd. reported in 446 ITR 1 (SC), he submitted that the assessee cannot claim the deduction u/s. 80IA in the revised return when such claim was not made in the original return. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, he submitted that when the assessee is a works contractor and the company executes only contract work and is not a developer, therefore, even otherwise als…

Godhavadar Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Godhavadar, Liliya Mota, Amreli-365535 vs. The ADIT (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 315/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT ] Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2019-20 Godhavadar Seva Sahakari The ADIT(CPC), Mandali Ltd. Amreli Bangalore PAN: AADAG1703G Vs (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 19-04-2023 Date of pronouncement : 25-04-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2019-20, arises from order of National Faceless Appeal Ce…

Batava Devli Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Batava Devli, Tal. Kunlava, Dist. Amreli vs. The ADIT, (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 314/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(ii)Section 143(1)(v)Section 250Section 80Section 80A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT ] Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2019-20 Batava Devli Seva The ADIT(CPC), Sahakari Mandali Ltd. Bangaluru Batavadevali-365480 Vs (Respondent) PAN:AAAAB0644E (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 19-04-2023 Date of pronouncement : 25-04-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2019-20, arises from order of National Fac…

Indore Contract Bridge Association Yeashwant Club, Indore vs. ITO, Ward-Examption, Indore

ITA 403/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Indore Contract Bridge Cpc, Association, Bangalore बनाम/ Yashwant Club, Race Course Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaaai 1652 F Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

…first-appeal; when the matter reached ITAT, the Mumbai Bench has allowed exemption to assessee. Ld. AR submitted that the decision taken by ITAT is directly applicable to assessee. Ld. AR also submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Wipro Ltd. 446 ITR 1 relied upon by Ld. CIT(A) is quite distinguishable for the reasons that (i) the said decision involved deduction u/s section 10B whereas the present-appeal is concerned with exemption u/s 11/12; and (ii) the said decision involved interpretation of sub-section (8) of section 10B which is a negative provision i.e. it provides that if the assessee di…

Rohit Vijay Singh, Mumbai vs. DCIT/ACIT, CPC, Bangalore, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2916/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blerohit Vijay Singh V. Dcit/Acit 6/603, Dhanalaxmi Building Centralized Processing Centre B-Wing, Mitha Nagar Bangalore M.G. Road, Goregaon (W) Mumbai - 400060 Ward 17(1)(1) Mumbai Kautilya Bhavan Pan: Balps2871R Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra(E), Mumbai - 400050 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 128(9)Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234Section 90

…rn of income. Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 11. We further find that the coordinate bench of the Tribunal, in the aforesaid decision, also considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Wipro Ltd., [2022] 140 Taxmann.com 223 (SC), upon which reliance was placed by the learned DR during the hearing. 12. We find that in another decision in Anuj Bhagwati vs DCIT, in ITAs No.1844 and 1845/Mum./2022, the coordinate bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 20/09/2022, while deciding a similar issue held that section 90/91 of the Act has not been amended insofar as gr…

Gridco Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 42/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri George Mathan & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Grid Corporation Of Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Orissa Ltd. Janapath, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.V.Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. Cit (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 29 /03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 /03/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain/P.V.Rao, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. CIT (OSD)
Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 139(5)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Grid Corporation of Vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Orissa Ltd. Janapath, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AABCG 5398 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.V.Rao, ARs Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. CIT (OSD) Date of Hearing : 29 /03/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29 /03/2023 O R D E R Per Bench ITA No.42/CTK/2018: Asst.year: 2014-15 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the…

M/S. Gridco Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 148/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri George Mathan & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Grid Corporation Of Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Orissa Ltd. Janapath, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.V.Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. Cit (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 29 /03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 /03/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain/P.V.Rao, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. CIT (OSD)
Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 139(5)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Grid Corporation of Vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Orissa Ltd. Janapath, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AABCG 5398 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.V.Rao, ARs Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. CIT (OSD) Date of Hearing : 29 /03/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29 /03/2023 O R D E R Per Bench ITA No.42/CTK/2018: Asst.year: 2014-15 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the…

Shree Sanaliya Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd., Lital Motaliliya Sanaliya, Dist. Amreli vs. The DCIT (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 204/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

…ITA Nos.186, 197, 204 & 203/RJT/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (for all) Page 1 of 10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ambaradi Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Ambaradi, Bengaluru. Ta. Savarkundla, Amreli – 364 522. [PAN – AABAA 9907 C] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dhareshwar Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Dhareshwar, Bengaluru. Rajula, Amreli – 365 560. [PAN – AAAAD 8596 R] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Sa…

Amrutpur Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., Village: - Amrutpur Taluka Dhari, Dist. Amreli vs. The DCIT (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 203/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

…ITA Nos.186, 197, 204 & 203/RJT/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (for all) Page 1 of 10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ambaradi Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Ambaradi, Bengaluru. Ta. Savarkundla, Amreli – 364 522. [PAN – AABAA 9907 C] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dhareshwar Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Dhareshwar, Bengaluru. Rajula, Amreli – 365 560. [PAN – AAAAD 8596 R] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Sa…

Dhareshwar Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Village: - Dhareshwar, Taluka: - Rajula, Dist. Amreli vs. The DCIT (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 197/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

…ITA Nos.186, 197, 204 & 203/RJT/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (for all) Page 1 of 10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ambaradi Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Ambaradi, Bengaluru. Ta. Savarkundla, Amreli – 364 522. [PAN – AABAA 9907 C] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dhareshwar Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Dhareshwar, Bengaluru. Rajula, Amreli – 365 560. [PAN – AAAAD 8596 R] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Sa…

Ambaradi Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., Ambaradi, Dist. Amreli vs. The DCIT(CPC), Bangaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 186/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

…ITA Nos.186, 197, 204 & 203/RJT/2022 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (for all) Page 1 of 10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ambaradi Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Ambaradi, Bengaluru. Ta. Savarkundla, Amreli – 364 522. [PAN – AABAA 9907 C] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dhareshwar Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., vs. The DCIT (CPC), Dhareshwar, Bengaluru. Rajula, Amreli – 365 560. [PAN – AAAAD 8596 R] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Sa…

Mahendra Kumar Damani, Viruthunagar vs. ADIT(CPC), Bengalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the AY 2016-17 is

ITA 806/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.805 & 806/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2019-20 Mr.Mahendra Kumar Damani, V. The Asst. Director Of- 7/5, Velayutham Rastha, Sivakasi, Income Tax, Virudhunagar District-626 123. Cpc, Bangalore.

For Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 10ASection 10A(5)Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 143(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.805 & 806/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2019-20 Mr.Mahendra Kumar Damani, v. The Asst. Director of- 7/5, Velayutham Rastha, Sivakasi, Income Tax, Virudhunagar District-626 123. CPC, Bangalore. [PAN: AAPPD 4457 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.T. Vasudeva…

Mahendra Kumar Damani, Viruthunagar vs. ADIT(CPC), Bengalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the AY 2016-17 is

ITA 805/CHNY/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.805 & 806/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2019-20 Mr.Mahendra Kumar Damani, V. The Asst. Director Of- 7/5, Velayutham Rastha, Sivakasi, Income Tax, Virudhunagar District-626 123. Cpc, Bangalore.

For Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 10ASection 10A(5)Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 143(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.805 & 806/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2019-20 Mr.Mahendra Kumar Damani, v. The Asst. Director of- 7/5, Velayutham Rastha, Sivakasi, Income Tax, Virudhunagar District-626 123. CPC, Bangalore. [PAN: AAPPD 4457 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.T. Vasudeva…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5704/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…ra) wherein the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, after considering the provisions of section 80AC of the Act and considering the judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. GM Knitting Industries Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd., 446 ITR 1 (SC) held as follows: “5. I have heard both the sides and scanned through the relevant material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee did not file return of income for the year under consideration either originally or pursuant to notice u/s 148. Computation of income was filed during the course of assessment proceedings in which th…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5703/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…ra) wherein the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, after considering the provisions of section 80AC of the Act and considering the judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. GM Knitting Industries Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd., 446 ITR 1 (SC) held as follows: “5. I have heard both the sides and scanned through the relevant material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee did not file return of income for the year under consideration either originally or pursuant to notice u/s 148. Computation of income was filed during the course of assessment proceedings in which th…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5702/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…ra) wherein the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, after considering the provisions of section 80AC of the Act and considering the judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. GM Knitting Industries Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd., 446 ITR 1 (SC) held as follows: “5. I have heard both the sides and scanned through the relevant material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee did not file return of income for the year under consideration either originally or pursuant to notice u/s 148. Computation of income was filed during the course of assessment proceedings in which th…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5701/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…ra) wherein the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, after considering the provisions of section 80AC of the Act and considering the judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. GM Knitting Industries Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd., 446 ITR 1 (SC) held as follows: “5. I have heard both the sides and scanned through the relevant material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee did not file return of income for the year under consideration either originally or pursuant to notice u/s 148. Computation of income was filed during the course of assessment proceedings in which th…