Protos Engineer Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT

211 ITR 919High Court1995#12401 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Judgments citing Protos Engineer Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Amrut Prasad Patnam, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee as well as the only appeal filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1894/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…ITA 1704 to 1707 and 1894 of 2018 Srinivas Uppu आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 1704/Hyd/2018 Shri Srinivas Dy. CIT, Central Circle 2009-10 Uppu, 1(2) Hyderabad Secunderabad PAN:AADPU6152G 1705/Hyd/2018 - Do - -do- 2010-11 1706/Hyd/2018 Shri P. Amruth -do- 2009-10 Prasad, Hyderabad PAN:ACUPP3686K 1707/Hyd/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1894/Hyd/2018 Dy. CIT, Central Shri P. Amruth Prasad, 2010-11 Circle 1(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:…

P Amruth Prasad, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee as well as the only appeal filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1707/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…ITA 1704 to 1707 and 1894 of 2018 Srinivas Uppu आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 1704/Hyd/2018 Shri Srinivas Dy. CIT, Central Circle 2009-10 Uppu, 1(2) Hyderabad Secunderabad PAN:AADPU6152G 1705/Hyd/2018 - Do - -do- 2010-11 1706/Hyd/2018 Shri P. Amruth -do- 2009-10 Prasad, Hyderabad PAN:ACUPP3686K 1707/Hyd/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1894/Hyd/2018 Dy. CIT, Central Shri P. Amruth Prasad, 2010-11 Circle 1(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:…

P Amrutha Prasad, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee as well as the only appeal filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1706/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…ITA 1704 to 1707 and 1894 of 2018 Srinivas Uppu आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 1704/Hyd/2018 Shri Srinivas Dy. CIT, Central Circle 2009-10 Uppu, 1(2) Hyderabad Secunderabad PAN:AADPU6152G 1705/Hyd/2018 - Do - -do- 2010-11 1706/Hyd/2018 Shri P. Amruth -do- 2009-10 Prasad, Hyderabad PAN:ACUPP3686K 1707/Hyd/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1894/Hyd/2018 Dy. CIT, Central Shri P. Amruth Prasad, 2010-11 Circle 1(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:…

Srinivas Uppu, Secunderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee as well as the only appeal filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1705/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…ITA 1704 to 1707 and 1894 of 2018 Srinivas Uppu आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 1704/Hyd/2018 Shri Srinivas Dy. CIT, Central Circle 2009-10 Uppu, 1(2) Hyderabad Secunderabad PAN:AADPU6152G 1705/Hyd/2018 - Do - -do- 2010-11 1706/Hyd/2018 Shri P. Amruth -do- 2009-10 Prasad, Hyderabad PAN:ACUPP3686K 1707/Hyd/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1894/Hyd/2018 Dy. CIT, Central Shri P. Amruth Prasad, 2010-11 Circle 1(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:…

Srinivas Uppu, Secunderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee as well as the only appeal filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1704/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…ITA 1704 to 1707 and 1894 of 2018 Srinivas Uppu आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 1704/Hyd/2018 Shri Srinivas Dy. CIT, Central Circle 2009-10 Uppu, 1(2) Hyderabad Secunderabad PAN:AADPU6152G 1705/Hyd/2018 - Do - -do- 2010-11 1706/Hyd/2018 Shri P. Amruth -do- 2009-10 Prasad, Hyderabad PAN:ACUPP3686K 1707/Hyd/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1894/Hyd/2018 Dy. CIT, Central Shri P. Amruth Prasad, 2010-11 Circle 1(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:…

Bela Investment & Fianance Co Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 3702/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S ShahFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 41

…assessee. The ld. CIT(A) primarily relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd (1985) 155 ITR 78 (Bom) and the decision in the case of Protes Engineers Co.Pvt Ltd V/s CIT (1995) 211 ITR 919 (Bom) by holding that there was a direct nexus with the business of the assessee of these unclaimed balances and therefore covered under the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act as benefit accrued from the business of the assessee. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. Further aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the asses…

Bela Investment & Investment Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(1)2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 6776/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S ShahFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 41

…assessee. The ld. CIT(A) primarily relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd (1985) 155 ITR 78 (Bom) and the decision in the case of Protes Engineers Co.Pvt Ltd V/s CIT (1995) 211 ITR 919 (Bom) by holding that there was a direct nexus with the business of the assessee of these unclaimed balances and therefore covered under the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act as benefit accrued from the business of the assessee. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. Further aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the asses…

ITO 8(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bela Investment & Finance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 6759/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S ShahFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 41

…assessee. The ld. CIT(A) primarily relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd (1985) 155 ITR 78 (Bom) and the decision in the case of Protes Engineers Co.Pvt Ltd V/s CIT (1995) 211 ITR 919 (Bom) by holding that there was a direct nexus with the business of the assessee of these unclaimed balances and therefore covered under the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act as benefit accrued from the business of the assessee. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. Further aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the asses…