State of U.P v. Amar Nath Yadav

PR.COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX-4 vs. HISTORIC INFRACONE PVT.LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…ted benefit for the Government Departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.” 6. The above observation has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422. 7. The explanation offered by the Revenue for the extraordinary delay of 335 days in filing the appeal is unsatisfactory. The application is accordingly dismissed. 8. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. OCTOBER 13, 2017/rd…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-8 vs. OKS SPAN TECH. PVT. LTD.

The appeal is dismissed both on delay and merits

Bench: This Hon'Ble Court...”

…ted benefit for the Government Departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.” 4. The above observation has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422. 5. The above explanation offered by the Appellant is insufficient for the Court to be persuaded to condone the delay. 6. The Court has nevertheless also examined the merits of the case. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 9th June 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal („ITAT‟) in ITA No. 481/Del./2014 f…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 9 vs. M/S WORLD WINDOW IMPEX INDIA PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…ed benefit for the Government Departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.” 4. The above observation has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422. 5. Viewed in light of the law explained, the above explanation offered by the Appellant is both unsatisfactory and insufficient for the Court to be persuaded to condone the extraordinary delay of 344 days in filing the appeal. ITA 607/2017 Page 2 of 3 6. The application is accordingly dismissed.…

DELHI BUILDING&OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERSWELFARE BOARD vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION )

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…anticipated benefit for the Government Departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few. 4. The above observation has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422. 5. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J JULY 17, 2017/dk ITA 495/2017 Page 2 of 2…

DELHI BUILDING &OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…anticipated benefit for the Government Departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few. 4. The above observation has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422. 5. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. JULY 17, 2017/dk ITA 497/2017 Page 2 of 2…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 9 vs. M/S WORLD WINDOW IMPEX INDIA PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…d benefit for the Government Departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.” 3. The above observation has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422. 4. The above explanation offered by the Appellant is insufficient for the Court to be persuaded to condoned the delay. ITA 519/2017 Page 2 of 3. 5. The application is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J J…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. HISTORIC INFRACON

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: The

…ITA 409/2017 Page 1 of 3 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 23 + ITA 409/2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Ashok Manchanda, Advocate versus HISTORIC INFRACON ..... Respondent Through: None CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR O R D E R % 19.05.2017 CM No. 18991/2017 (exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM No. 18992/2017 (for condonation of delay of…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. HISTORIC INFRACON PVT LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

…ITA No.394/2017 Page 1 of 4 $~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 394/2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ashok K.Manchanda, Advocate with Mr.Raghvendra Singh, Advocate. Versus HISTORIC INFRACON PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR O R D E R % 12.05.2017 C.M.No.18104/2017 (Exemptions) 1. Allowed subject to all just exceptions C.M.No.18105/2017 (delay in re-filing) 2. For the reasons stated…

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-09,NEW DELHI vs. USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE JAY ENGINEERING WORKS LTD.)

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

…$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 326/2017 PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-09,NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Arun Khatri, Junior Standing Counsel versus USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE JAY ENGINEERING WORKS LTD.) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. V.P. Gupta & Mr. Arunav Kumar, Advocates CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR O R D E R % 01.05.2017 CM No.16419/2017 1. There is a delay of 190 days in filing the appeal. The explanation offered for the delay is given in paras 3, 4 and 5 of the explana…

CIT vs. ELEGANT TRAVELS PVT LTD

Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…the Department has miserably failed to give any acceptable and cogent reasons sufficient to condone such a huge delay. Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay.” 23. In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422 while reiterating the above decision, the Supreme Court declined to condone the delay of 481 days in the State filing a special leave petition against the ITA Nos. 453 & 464 of 2012 Page 12 of 12 judgment of the High Court of Allahabad. 24. Consequently, the Court is not satisfied with the reasons offered for the e…

CIT vs. ARVINDER SINGH

Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…the Department has miserably failed to give any acceptable and cogent reasons sufficient to condone such a huge delay. Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay.” 23. In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422 while reiterating the above decision, the Supreme Court declined to condone the delay of 481 days in the State filing a special leave petition against the ITA Nos. 453 & 464 of 2012 Page 12 of 12 judgment of the High Court of Allahabad. 24. Consequently, the Court is not satisfied with the reasons offered for the e…