Taylor Investment Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT

232 ITR 771High Court1998#13795 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 80ib(10)section 119(2)(b)section 80ibsection 80icommissioner (appeals)section 14areasonable causesection 80condonation of delayopportunity of being heardcompanysection 14

Judgments citing Taylor Investment Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT-Central Circle -1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Aarti International Ltd., Ludhiana

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 102/CHANDI/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Cit(A)?

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(2)Section 250(6)

…c Glass Industries Ltd. V. CIT (supra) and the registered office of the respondent assessee being in the State of Gujarat, the law laid down by the Gujarat High Court was binding. (See Taylor Instrument Com. (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax - (1998) 232 ITR 771, Commissioner of Gift Tax v. J.K. Jain - (1998) 230 ITR 839, Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sunil Kumar - (1995) 212 1TR 238, Commissioner of Income Tax v. Thana Electricity Supply Ltd. - (1994) 206 ITR 727, Indian Tube Company Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. - (1993) 203 ITR 54, Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.C. Joshi & B.C. Joshi - (1…

Shri Vikas Gangadhar Jagtap, Ahmednagar vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward -1, Ahmednagar

Appeal is allowed

ITA 93/PUN/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Aug 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Prasad S. Bhandari (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)Section 40a

…sing Officer had himself concluded in para 8 of the assessment order that the assessee had never even produced his books of accounts coupled with fact that the same remained un-audited as well. That being the case, I quote Indwell Constructions Vs. CIT (1978) 232 ITR 771 (AP) that the impugned disallowance is not sustainable in case of non-availability of books of accounts or rejection thereof. The impugned disallowance is directed to be deleted for ITA 93/PUN/2022 Vikas G. Jagtap A.Y. 2016-17 this precise reason alone. The Revenue’s vehement contentions supporting the impugned disallowance are rejected according…

Tata Petrodyne Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1570/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2022AY 2007-08
Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1568/Mum/2019 to 1570/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years :2005-06 to 2007-08) M/s. Tata Petrodyne Limited Vs. The Addl. Commissioner of 5th Floor, Metropolitan Income Tax, 2(3) Bandra Kurla Complex Room No.555, Aayakar Bandra East Bhavan Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACT0090N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Kaushik Bhatia Revenue by Shri Murali Mohan Date of Hearing 13/06/2022 Date of Pronouncement 29/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANE…

Tata Petrodyne Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1569/MUM/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2022AY 2006-07
Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1568/Mum/2019 to 1570/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years :2005-06 to 2007-08) M/s. Tata Petrodyne Limited Vs. The Addl. Commissioner of 5th Floor, Metropolitan Income Tax, 2(3) Bandra Kurla Complex Room No.555, Aayakar Bandra East Bhavan Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACT0090N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Kaushik Bhatia Revenue by Shri Murali Mohan Date of Hearing 13/06/2022 Date of Pronouncement 29/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANE…

Tata Petrodyne Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1568/MUM/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2022AY 2005-06
Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1568/Mum/2019 to 1570/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years :2005-06 to 2007-08) M/s. Tata Petrodyne Limited Vs. The Addl. Commissioner of 5th Floor, Metropolitan Income Tax, 2(3) Bandra Kurla Complex Room No.555, Aayakar Bandra East Bhavan Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACT0090N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Kaushik Bhatia Revenue by Shri Murali Mohan Date of Hearing 13/06/2022 Date of Pronouncement 29/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANE…

Sulzer Pumps India Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Shri S. SriramFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan, Shri Sushil Kr
Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 92CSection 95D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sulzer Pumps India Limited, Deputy Commissioner of Income 9, MIDC, Digha, Thane Belapur Vs. Tax, Circle 15(3)(2), Road, Navi Mumbai-400708. Room No. 473, Aayakar Bhavan, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACK 2238 F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri V. Sridharan, Shri S. Sriram, Shri Narendra Dave Revenue by : Shri A. Mohan, Shri Sushil Kr. Mishra Date of Hearing : 28/01/20…

Tata Petrodyne Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4887/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Firoz B. AndhyarujinaFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 10(35)Section 115JSection 14ASection 154Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.4887/Mum./2012 (Assessment Year : 2008–09) Tata Petrodyne Ltd. The Metropolitan Building 3rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex ……………. Appellant Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051 PAN – AAACT0090N v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(3), Mumbai ITA no.5571/Mum./2012 (Assessment Year : 2008–09) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–2(3), Mumbai v/s Tata Petrodyne Ltd. The Metropolitan Building 3rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex ……………. Respo…

Taylor Investment Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT (232 ITR 771) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax