Smt.Sujata Grover v. DCIT

74 TTJ 347Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2002#4785 most cited

What is Smt.Sujata Grover v. DCIT authority for?

Foreign exchange gains are includible in profits eligible for deduction under sections 10A/10B of the Income Tax Act, as they represent a form of additional sales price arising from export turnover. The case also supports claims for deduction on export of computer software under section 80HHE.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Smt. Sujata Grover v. DCIT · section 10A · section 10B · section 80HHE · foreign exchange gain · export turnover · computer software deduction · eligible business · additional sales price

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 250Section 263

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhcomputer softwareeligible businesssection 10asection 10section 80section 139(1)transfersection 147companysection 250india

Judgments citing Smt.Sujata Grover v. DCIT

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NUWAVE E SOLUTIONS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3676/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Acit, Vs M/S. Nuwave E Solutions (P) Circle-13(1), Ltd., 3Rd Floor, District Centre, New Delhi Dda Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi. Pan-Aabcn5790Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pravin Rawal, Cit Dr Respondent By Dr. Rakesh Gutpa, Adv., Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca, Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 15.03.2011 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-Xvi, New Delhi [“Cit(A)”, In Short] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2010 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Company & E- Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.08.2007, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 1,45,48,453/-. The Said Return Was Revised On 20.08.2008, Declaring The Same Income As Was Declared The Return Of Income Filed U/S 139(1). The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Various Queries Were Raised Which Were Replied By The Assessee. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Development & Export Of Software & 100% Eou Registered With Director Software Technology Park Of India In Terms Of Registration Certificate Dated 31.03.1999. The Major Shareholder In The Assessee Company Is Shri Anil Gutpa Who Is Having 99% Shareholding & Is Taking Substantial Interest In Day-To-Day Affairs Of The Assessee & Also In Its Associate Enterprises (“Ae”) At Us Who Is The Sole Buyer Of The Software Developed By The Assessee.

Section 10Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 801A

…additional sales price. Therefore foreign exchange gain is includible in the profits eligible for deduction under section 104/10B of the Act. Further reliance can be placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- a) Smt. Sujatha Grover v. Deputy CIT (2002) 74 TTJ 347 (Delhi) b) Priyanka Gems v. Asst. CIT [2005] 94 TTJ 557 (And) c) CIT v. Rane (Madras) Ltd. [1999] 238 ITR 377 (Mad), where even a forward contract in foreign exchange, which had nexus with the export of goods could be treated as relating to the activity eligible for deduction in the context of sections 80E and 80-I. In fact, the case of the appell…

NIHO CONSTRUCTION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 18(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3676/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Acit, Vs M/S. Nuwave E Solutions (P) Circle-13(1), Ltd., 3Rd Floor, District Centre, New Delhi Dda Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi. Pan-Aabcn5790Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pravin Rawal, Cit Dr Respondent By Dr. Rakesh Gutpa, Adv., Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca, Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 15.03.2011 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-Xvi, New Delhi [“Cit(A)”, In Short] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2010 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Company & E- Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.08.2007, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 1,45,48,453/-. The Said Return Was Revised On 20.08.2008, Declaring The Same Income As Was Declared The Return Of Income Filed U/S 139(1). The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Various Queries Were Raised Which Were Replied By The Assessee. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Development & Export Of Software & 100% Eou Registered With Director Software Technology Park Of India In Terms Of Registration Certificate Dated 31.03.1999. The Major Shareholder In The Assessee Company Is Shri Anil Gutpa Who Is Having 99% Shareholding & Is Taking Substantial Interest In Day-To-Day Affairs Of The Assessee & Also In Its Associate Enterprises (“Ae”) At Us Who Is The Sole Buyer Of The Software Developed By The Assessee.

Section 10Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 801A

…additional sales price. Therefore foreign exchange gain is includible in the profits eligible for deduction under section 104/10B of the Act. Further reliance can be placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- a) Smt. Sujatha Grover v. Deputy CIT (2002) 74 TTJ 347 (Delhi) b) Priyanka Gems v. Asst. CIT [2005] 94 TTJ 557 (And) c) CIT v. Rane (Madras) Ltd. [1999] 238 ITR 377 (Mad), where even a forward contract in foreign exchange, which had nexus with the export of goods could be treated as relating to the activity eligible for deduction in the context of sections 80E and 80-I. In fact, the case of the appell…

M/S. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. - 38, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 4695/MUM/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. United Phosphorus Limited, Mumbai (Now Known As Uniphos Enterprises Ltd.) Uniphos House, 11-C.D. Marg Opp. Madhu Park Khar (W), Mumbai – 400 052 Pan: Aaacu3440P ...... Appellant Vs. Acit Cc -2 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-38 Mumbai ..... Respondent Acit Cc -2 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-38 Mumbai ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. United Phosphorus Limited, Mumbai (Now Known As Uniphos Enterprises Ltd.) Uniphos House, 11-C.D. Marg Opp. Madhu Park Khar (W) Mumbai – 400 052 Pan: Aaacu3440P ...... Respondent (Now Known As Uniphos Enterprises Ltd.)

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti B Patel / Shri KiritFor Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. United Phosphorus Limited, Mumbai (Now known as Uniphos Enterprises Ltd.) Uniphos House, 11-C.D. Marg Opp. Madhu Park Khar (W), Mumbai – 400 052 PAN: AAACU3440P ...... Appellant Vs. ACIT CC -2 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-38 Mumbai ..... Respondent ACIT CC -2 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-38 Mumbai ...... Appellant Vs. M/s. United Phosphorus Limited, Mumbai (Now known as Uniphos Enterprises Ltd.) Uniphos House, 11-C.D. Marg Opp. Mad…

DCIT-3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SYNTEL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1972/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit-3(2)(1), Syntel Private Limited, Room No. 608, 6Th Floor, Unit No. 112 Sdf Iv, Seepz Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Andheri East Mumbai-400096. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacs 8305 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Harsh M. KapadiaFor Respondent: Mr. Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 80A(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2016-17 DCIT-3(2)(1), Syntel Private Limited, Room No. 608, 6th floor, Unit No. 112 SDF IV, Seepz Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Andheri East Mumbai-400096. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACS 8305 D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Harsh M. Kapadia Revenue by : Mr. Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 06/09/2023 Date of pronouncement : 08/09/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,HISAR vs. CIT, HISAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1462/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. Najmi, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(2)Section 80

…ally considered by the CIT(Appeals), the entire issue merges with the order of CIT(Appeals) and no other aspect of that issue can be subjected to revision under section 263 of the Act: Oil India Ltd. v. CIT, Calcutta: 138 ITR 836 Smt. Sujatha Grower v. DICT: 74 TTJ 347 Sahara India Mutual Benefit Co. Ltd v. ACIT: 74 TTJ 67 Saw Pipes Limited v. ACIT: 94 TTJ 1036 Sonal Garments v. JCIT: 95 ITD 363 Maricolndustries Ltd. v. ACIT: 115 TTJ 497 In view of the aforesaid, the assessment order qua the issues/ claim, which was subject matter of appeal before the CIT(A) and ITAT (deduction under sections 80IA and 80IB of…

NOKIA INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2004 – 05 and 2005 – 06 are partly allowed

ITA 2161/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

…High Court In CIT Versus Infosys Technologies Ltd (2012) 349 ITR 606 and CIT Versus Novel Software Development Private Limited (2013) 355 ITR 339. The issue is also been decided in favour of the assessee by the coordinate bench in Sujata Grover V DCIT (2002) 74 TTJ 347 Delhi. 25. The learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the learned assessing officer. 26. We have carefully considered the rival submission as well as the order of the lower authorities. During the year the assessee has claimed deduction on export of computer software u/s 80 HHE of the income tax act amounting to ₹ 1,…

NOKIA INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2004 – 05 and 2005 – 06 are partly allowed

ITA 2160/DEL/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

…High Court In CIT Versus Infosys Technologies Ltd (2012) 349 ITR 606 and CIT Versus Novel Software Development Private Limited (2013) 355 ITR 339. The issue is also been decided in favour of the assessee by the coordinate bench in Sujata Grover V DCIT (2002) 74 TTJ 347 Delhi. 25. The learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the learned assessing officer. 26. We have carefully considered the rival submission as well as the order of the lower authorities. During the year the assessee has claimed deduction on export of computer software u/s 80 HHE of the income tax act amounting to ₹ 1,…

M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

ITA 799/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NABROS PHARMA LTD., AHMEDABAD

ITA 788/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,, VADODARA

ITA 551/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1(2),(TPO), BARODA

ITA 2061/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

ITA 1197/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE CIT-I,, BARODA

ITA 1453/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

SRI GOVIND LAL RATHI,KOLKATA vs. PR. CIT-15, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 525/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 525/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sri Govind Lal Rathi -Vs.- Pr. C.I.T., Kol-15, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Adipr 0507 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Sunil Surana, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri R.S.Biswas, Cit Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.S.Biswas, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(14)Section 263

…of CIT vs Farida Prime Tannery reported in 135 Taxman 70 (Mad) c) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Sri Arbuda Mills Ltd reported in 231 ITR 50 (SC). d) Decision of co-ordinate bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Sujata Grover vs ACIT reported in 74 TTJ 347 . 6.2. In view of the aforesaid findings and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that the ld. CIT grossly erred in invoking the 12 Sri Govind Lal Rathi A.Yr.2012-13 revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case and accordingly we hereby quash the revision order p…

M/S AB (WINES) STORES,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOLKATA-14, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 901/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.901/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ab (Wines) Stores -Vs.- Pr. C.I.T., Kolkata-14 Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aajfa 6312 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri R.S.Biswas, Cit Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.S.Biswas, CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

…in 135 Taxman 70 (Mad) c) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Sri Arbuda Mills Ltd reported in 231 ITR 50 (SC). 18 M/s. AB (Wines) Stores A.Yr.2011-12 d) Decision of co-ordinate bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Sujata Grover vs ACIT reported in 74 TTJ 347 . 10.5. Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions , we hold that an issue of disallowance of purchases u/s 40A(3) of the Act is already the subject matter of appellate proceedings before the ld CITA and hence the same cannot be the subject matter of re-verification and re-adjudication from different perspective by the ld CIT under revisionar…

M/S. SHALIMAR ENTERPRISES,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 108/DEL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 28Section 80H

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘G’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 108/Del./2012 Assessment Year: 2002-03 M/s. Shalimar Enterprises, vs. A.C.I.T., Circle 24(1), A-61, Naraina Indl. Area, Phase-I, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN – AADFS 7523B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Gurjeet Singh, Advocate Revenue by Ms. Vishmita Tej, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.06.2017 Date of Pronouncement 16.06.2017 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XXIII, New Delhi dated 17.10.20…

BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. PR.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned order dated 31

ITA 2193/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Anadi N Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chander, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 263

…vs. CIT 138 ITR 836 10. CIT vs. Sashi Theatre Pvt. Ltd. 248 ITR 126 11. CIT vs. Nirma Chemicals Works (P.) Ltd. 182 Taxman 183 12. CIT vs. K. Sera Sera Productions Ltd. 374 ITR 503 13. CIT vs. Salonah Tea Co. Ltd. 62 taxman 51 14. Mrs. Sujata Grover vs. DCIT 74 TTJ 347 7 FIT For PUBLICATION (AM) (JM) 15. Sonal Garments vs. JCIT 95 ITD 363 16. Marico Industries Ltd. vs. ACIT 27 SOT 73 17. DIT vs. Jyoti Foundation ; 357 ITR 388 18. CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. 341 ITR 166 19. CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Ltd. 341 ITR 180 20. CIT vs. Ashish Rajpal 320 ITR 674 21. CIT vs. Contimeters Electricals…

ITO 10(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. LIONBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES P.LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 290/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…Impex vs. ACIT”, 121 Taxman 326 (Del.) 9. “ITO vs. Banyan Chemicals (P) Ltd.”, 310 ITR 384 15 ITA No.668(Asr)/2014 10. “Livingstones Jewellery (P) Ltd.”, 31 SOT 323 11. DCIT vs. Accentures Services (P) Ltd.” ITA No.4540/M/08 (Mum. ITAT) 12. “Sujata Grover”, 74 TTJ 347 (Del.) 13. “Deutsche Bank A.G. vs. DCIT”, 86 ITD 431 14. “Bestobell (India) Ltd”, 117 ITR 789 (Cal.) 15. “Khandelwal Brothers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT”, 117 ITR 452 (Cal. 16. “CIT vs. Oil India Ltd.” 143 ITR 848 (Cal.) 17. “CIT vs. Martin and Harris P. Ltd.” 154 ITR 460 (Cal.) 18. “Oil and Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd. vs. DCIT”, (2003) 261 ITR 1 (SB) (Delhi IT…

LIONBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES P.LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7415/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…Impex vs. ACIT”, 121 Taxman 326 (Del.) 9. “ITO vs. Banyan Chemicals (P) Ltd.”, 310 ITR 384 15 ITA No.668(Asr)/2014 10. “Livingstones Jewellery (P) Ltd.”, 31 SOT 323 11. DCIT vs. Accentures Services (P) Ltd.” ITA No.4540/M/08 (Mum. ITAT) 12. “Sujata Grover”, 74 TTJ 347 (Del.) 13. “Deutsche Bank A.G. vs. DCIT”, 86 ITD 431 14. “Bestobell (India) Ltd”, 117 ITR 789 (Cal.) 15. “Khandelwal Brothers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT”, 117 ITR 452 (Cal. 16. “CIT vs. Oil India Ltd.” 143 ITR 848 (Cal.) 17. “CIT vs. Martin and Harris P. Ltd.” 154 ITR 460 (Cal.) 18. “Oil and Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd. vs. DCIT”, (2003) 261 ITR 1 (SB) (Delhi IT…

LIONBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO RG 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 668/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…Impex vs. ACIT”, 121 Taxman 326 (Del.) 9. “ITO vs. Banyan Chemicals (P) Ltd.”, 310 ITR 384 15 ITA No.668(Asr)/2014 10. “Livingstones Jewellery (P) Ltd.”, 31 SOT 323 11. DCIT vs. Accentures Services (P) Ltd.” ITA No.4540/M/08 (Mum. ITAT) 12. “Sujata Grover”, 74 TTJ 347 (Del.) 13. “Deutsche Bank A.G. vs. DCIT”, 86 ITD 431 14. “Bestobell (India) Ltd”, 117 ITR 789 (Cal.) 15. “Khandelwal Brothers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT”, 117 ITR 452 (Cal. 16. “CIT vs. Oil India Ltd.” 143 ITR 848 (Cal.) 17. “CIT vs. Martin and Harris P. Ltd.” 154 ITR 460 (Cal.) 18. “Oil and Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd. vs. DCIT”, (2003) 261 ITR 1 (SB) (Delhi IT…

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2