How many judgments cite Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO?

27 judgments on BharatTax cite Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO (364 ITR 689), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 194C, Section 195, Section 40(a)(ia), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 197.

Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO

364 ITR 689High Court2014#4422 most cited

What is Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO authority for?

The Kerala High Court decision in Prudential Logistics & Transports v. ITO held that the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not retrospective in effect for earlier assessment years.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO · 364 ITR 689 · Section 40(a)(ia) · second proviso · retrospective effect · non-retrospective · assessment year · disallowance · TDS

Also reported as

51 Taxmann.com 426228 Taxmann 320

Sections most often in play

Section 194C Section 195 Section 40(a)(ia)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 197 Section 197A Section 43B

Issues it is cited on

section 44ab(a)section 194a(1)section 195(2)section 197 interest on securities section 195 section 194a assessee in default section 194c section 201(1)section 40(a)section 40(a)(ia)

Judgments citing Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 496/COCH/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM ITA Nos. 464, 465 & 496/Coch/2025 Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2013-14 & 2010-11 Muthoot Fincorp Limited .......... Appellant Miuthoot Centre, Thiruvananthapuram 695001 [PAN: AACCM1453E] vs. JCIT, Special Range, Thiruvananthapuram ......... Respondent Assessee by: Shri R. Krishnan, CA Revenue by: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 19.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 22.08.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These are appeals filed by the assessee against different orders of Commissioner of…

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 465/COCH/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 464/COCH/2025[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

GOPAL DENESHCHANDRA TULSHAN ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 201/NAG/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(3)Section 201(1)(b)Section 40Section 50

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMC MATTER ITA no.201/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2006–07) Gopal Dineshchandra Tulshan Prop: M/s. Tulshan World Furniture ……………. Appellant Near Vasant Talkies, Akola 444 001 PAN – AANPT1758R v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3, Akola Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 12/08/2024 Date of Order – 09/09/2023 O R D E R The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 22/03/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income T…

AHLERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 524/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 524/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ahlers India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner No.39, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Of Income Tax,, The Trapezium, Corporate Circle 1(1), Nelson Manickam Road, Chennai. Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 029. Pan: Aaeca 5688H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059291012 (1) Dated 02.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Circle 1(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2010-11 U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 16.02.2016. The Impugned Giving Effect To The Order Of The Tribunal Was Framed By The Dcit, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai Vide Order Dated 22.08.2017. 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Nfac Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Disallowing Expenses Paid To Various Non-Resident Parties For Non-Deduction Of Tds By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 40(A)(I) Of The Act Amounting To Rs.2,26,73,426/-. This Is The Only Limited Issue On Merits But Assessee Has Raised Various Other Issues Of Proper Opportunity Etc., Which Will Be Dealt With Later.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 524/CHNY/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ahlers India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner No.39, 2nd Floor, Vs. of Income Tax,, The Trapezium, Corporate Circle 1(1), Nelson Manickam Road, Chennai. Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 029. PAN: AAECA 5688H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Vikram Vijayarag…

MAHAVIR ADINATH SALVE,,SOLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (1),, SOLAPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 441/PUN/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.441/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Mahavir Adinath Salve, The Ito, Ward-1(1), Solapur. House No.930, Nagane Plot Vs Paranda Road, Barshi, . Solapur – 413411. Pan: Arxps 5761 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri V L Jain – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 11/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-7, Pune’S Order Dated 15.11.2018 Passed In Appeal No.Pn/Cit(A)-7/Cir- 1/0804/2016-17, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) has retrospective effect by the Delhi High Court in the Ansal Landmark Township cited supra while there is contrary decision of the Kerala High Court in case of Prudential Logistics & Transport• vs. ITO reported in 364 ITR 689. On consideration the ITAT, Pune Bench has held in favour of the appellant as the one that is favourable to the appellant has to be adopted and relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vegetable Products [1972] 88 ITR 172 {SC). However, the appellant has not filed the relevant form No. 26A issued by the CA supporting tha…

SRI.P. GOPALAKRISHNAN ALIAS DILEEP,ALUVA vs. THE ACIT, ALUVA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 164/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139Section 201Section 40

…e the assessment year in question is 2009-10 and the amendment was introduced by Finance Act, 2012 with effect from April 1, 2013 which is prospective in nature as held the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics and Transports vs. ITO (364 ITR 689), the said benefit is not applicable to the assessee. Hence, we decline to interfere with the order of the lower authorities and addition made u/s. 40(a)(ia) is confirmed. The request of the Ld. AR to remit the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the applicability of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is misconce…

M/S.RAJA &CO,PALAKKAD vs. THE DCIT, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 159/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 194CSection 40

…ere was no deduction of tax at source. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that the above amendment cannot be applied retrospectively in view of the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics and Transports vs. ITO (364 ITR 789) (Ker.) wherein it was held that second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) which was inserted by Finance Act of 2012 with effect from 1-4-2013 cannot be applied to the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The contention of the Ld. AR is that there is no written contract or oral between t…

M/S.RAJA &CO,PALAKKAD vs. THE DCIT, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 158/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 194CSection 40

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, NASHIK vs. M/S. ZEAL INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 159/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

For Appellant: Shri P.S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण] पुणे "यायपीठ “एक सद"य” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.159/PUN/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Asst.Commissioner of Income-Tax, ………. अपीलाथ" / Central Circle – 2, Nashik. Appellant बनाम v/s M/s. Zeal Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., ………. ""यथ" / Suyojit Heights, Opp. Rajiv Gandhi Respondent Bhavan, Sharanpur Road, Nashik – 422003. PAN : AAACZ3017F. Assessee by : Shri P.S. Shingte. Revenue by : Shri M.K. Verma. सुनवाई क" तार"ख / घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 04.06.2019…

IFC UNIVERSAL EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-8(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 4661/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4661/Mum/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12) बनधम/ M/S. Ifc Universal Ito 8(2)(1) Room No. 477, Aayakar Express Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, 11, Adeshwar Arcade, Mumbai-400020. Andheri-Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabci8524P (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Abirama Kartikiyen (Dr) Assessee By: Shri M. Subramanian (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/04/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 03.03.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Commissioner Of Income Lax (Appeals) Erred In Not Deleting Disallowance Of Expenses On Payments Of Freight Made To Jet Airways (India)Ltd Rs.7.15.765/- & To Kingfisher Airlines Ltd Rs.50,38,699/- U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Not Appreciating The Submissions Tiled By The Appellant, That The Introduction To Proviso To Section 201(I)Is Explanatory/Clarificatory & Therefore Should Apply Retrospectively & Therefore Payments Of Freight Without Tds

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian (AR)For Respondent: Shri Abirama Kartikiyen (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 201Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4661/Mum/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12) बनधम/ M/s. IFC Universal ITO 8(2)(1) Room No. 477, Aayakar Express Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, 11, Adeshwar Arcade, Mumbai-400020. Andheri-Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCI8524P (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue by: Shri Abirama Kartikiyen (DR) Assessee by: Shri M. Subramanian (AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 05.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /…

MANJEET KUMAR HUF PROP. RAWALPINDI JEWELLERS,KARNAL vs. ACIT, HARYANA

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

ITA 2885/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Mittal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 143Section 194ASection 201Section 250(6)Section 40

…plicable for earlier Assessment Years. For this the Ld. CIT(A) relied on decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court order dated 13.01.2014 in the case of M/s Prudential Logistics & Transports vs. The Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 1 of 2014 {now reported at [2014] 364 ITR 689 (Kerala)} and order dated 21.11.2014 in the case of The Kasargod District Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT, Circle 1 Kannur, in ITA No. 245/Coch/2014, {now reported at [2015] 55 taxmann.com 442 (Cochin- Trib.)}. Aggrieved again, the assessee has filed this appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short). Page 3 of 7 ITA No.- 288…

M/S.VIJAYA PALACE,,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 506/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 194ASection 40

…ssee are accordingly partly allowed.” 8.2 On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that the above amendment cannot be applied retrospectively in view of the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics and Transports vs. ITO (364 ITR 789) (Ker.) wherein it was held that second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) which was inserted by Finance Act of 2012 with effect from 1-4-2013 cannot be applied to the assessment year 2006-07. 8.3 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find no merit in the argument of the Ld. AR in view of the judgment of the Jurisdictional H…

SRI.V.J.FRANCIS M/S.LISCO COIR TEX,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT,, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 65/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Written submission by Smt.Lakshmi N., CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 17(2)Section 192Section 194Section 40

…he provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act cannot be applied. The second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted with effect from 1st April, 2013. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics and Transports v. ITO [(2014) 364 ITR 689 (Ker.)] had held that said benefit is ITA Nos.64 & 65/Coch/2019 8 Sri.V.J.Francis. available only from assessment year 2013-2014. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, we hold that the benefit of 2nd proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act cannot have application for the current assessment year. It is ordered accor…

SRI.V.J.FRANCIS M/S.LISCO COIR TEX,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT,, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 64/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Written submission by Smt.Lakshmi N., CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 17(2)Section 192Section 194Section 40

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. CANLINX LOGISTICS (I) P.LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 506/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 40Section 68

…(a)(ia) by Finance Act 2012 is declaratory and curative in nature and hence would apply retrospectively. The Ld A.R fairly submitted that a contrary view has been expressed by Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics and Transports (2014)(364 ITR 689). He submitted that the view in favour of the assessee is required to be followed, in case of divergent views expressed by different High Courts, as per the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme 3 M/s. Canlinx Logistics (I) Pvt. Ltd. Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd (88 ITR 192). He submitted that the Pune bench of ITAT has considered…

SHRAVASTI DEVELOPERS & AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO- 9(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2639/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…(a)(ia) by Finance Act 2012 is declaratory and curative in nature and hence would apply retrospectively. The Ld A.R fairly submitted that a contrary view has been expressed by Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics and Transports (2014)(364 ITR 689). He submitted that the view in favour of the assessee is required to be followed, in case of divergent views expressed by different High Courts, as per the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd (88 ITR 192). He submitted that the Pune bench of ITAT has considered an identical issue in the case of Yamaza…

PAWANKUMAR JYOTIPRASAD AGARWAL,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, PUNE

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

ITA 1016/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg

Section 40

…uring appellate proceedings on technical grounds without appreciating that these related to a legal ground/plea set up by the assessee and he ought to have considered/admitted these. In any case, he erred on placing reliance on Kerala High Court's decision in 364 ITR 689 wherein the facts were entirely different. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the amendment made vide second proviso to sec. 40(a)(ia) has a retrospective effect as has been judicially held and consequently no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) was warranted. 2 Pawankumar Jyotiprasad Ag…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, VADODARA vs. M/S. HANUMANT CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1835/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 May 2018AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 201Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2010-11 The ACIT, M/s. Hanumant Cir. 1(1)(2), Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vadodara Vs Ground Floor, Parwani (Appellant) Complex, Civil Lines, Raipur-492001 PAN: AABCH7062D (Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri Surendra Modiani, A.R. Date of hearing : 09-04-2018 Date of pronouncement : 10-05-2018 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This Revenue’s appeal for A.Y. 2010-11, arises from order of the CIT(A)-…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. ACP INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 590/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen, DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 201(1)Section 40

…eved, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Ld Departmental Representative strongly supported the order of the Assessing Officer, on the strength of the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics & Transports vs. ITO (364 ITR 689) wherein the Court observed that the second proviso was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2013 and hence it will not be retrospective in nature. 8. Learned Counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand, strongly relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township P Ltd (377 ITR 635) to contend that the secon…

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2