Vithalbhai P. Patel 236 ITR 1001 (Guj) and Anant Chunilal Kate v. ITO

111 ITD 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#6333 most cited
18

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

Issues it is cited on

personindiabusinessinterest

Judgments citing Vithalbhai P. Patel 236 ITR 1001 (Guj) and Anant Chunilal Kate v. ITO

UMAR DARAJ,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD-1(2)(4), MEERUT

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

ITA 3095/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Umar Daraj, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2)(4), 153/1, Hapur Road, Meerut. Umar Nagar, Meerut – 250 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Ainpd8766H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Citdr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 Date Of Order : 10.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman:

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CITDR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 40A

…R 192 (SC) mandates that where two interpretations are possible, the one favourable to the assessee must be adopted. This proposition has been consistently followed, inter alia, by the Special Bench of the ITAT in Narang Overseas (P) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2008] 111 ITD 1 (Mum.) (SB), which held that where conflicting High Court decisions exist and the jurisdictional High Court has not pronounced on the issue, the interpretation favourable to the assessee must prevail. D. THERE ARE DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE REASONS ON THE BASIS OF WHICH REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED AND THE REASONS ON THE BASIS OF WHICH AS…

TATA TELESERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1057/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Tata Vs. Assistant Commissioner Teleserviceslimited New Of Income Tax Circle 76(1) Delhi Districtcentral Laxmi Taxation Department Nagar New Delhi 110092 M/S Tata Teleservices Limited 2A, Old Ishwar Nahar Mathura Road New Delhi 110065 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 191Section 194Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Tata Vs. Assistant Commissioner TeleservicesLimited New Of Income Tax Circle 76(1) Delhi DistrictCentral Laxmi Taxation Department Nagar New Delhi 110092 M/s Tata Teleservices Limited 2A, Old Ishwar Nahar Mathura Road New Delhi 110065 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Ms Ananya Kapoor Advocate Respondent by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary CIT DR Date of hearing: 14/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement: 11/12/2024 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM: This appe…

DCIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD., PATIALA

In the result, ground no. 1 & 3 of the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and ground no

ITA 737/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saldi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(2)

…loss in the course of the business under varying circumstances was deductible as trading loss in computing the total income of the business. He also relied on the order passed by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Narang Overseas (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT [(2008) 111 ITD 1 (Mum.) (SB)] holding that the interest awarded on a capital receipt was also a capital receipt. Drawing strength from the ratio of these judgments / Tribunal orders, the learned A.R. stated that the refund of income-tax amounted to the restoration of its circulating capital and hence interest thereon would thus come under the head `Profits and gain…

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

ITA 5238/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA; Ms
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50

…becomes null and void for reasons of subsequent events, no capital gains can accrue thereon. In support, reliance was placed on Vithalbhai P. Patel 236 ITR 1001 (Guj) and Anant Chunilal Kate v. ITO [2004] 267 ITR 482 (Bom) followed by Narang Overseas (P.) Ltd 111 ITD 1 (Mumbai) (SB). Accordingly, he submitted when no capital gain accrues, then no tax is payable thereon. 47. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is the duty and power of this Court to take into consideration all the subsequent events in the interest of justice and placed reliance on undernoted authorities: 27 I.T.As. No.4736, 5237 & 5238/DEL/2017…

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

ITA 5237/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA; Ms
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50

…becomes null and void for reasons of subsequent events, no capital gains can accrue thereon. In support, reliance was placed on Vithalbhai P. Patel 236 ITR 1001 (Guj) and Anant Chunilal Kate v. ITO [2004] 267 ITR 482 (Bom) followed by Narang Overseas (P.) Ltd 111 ITD 1 (Mumbai) (SB). Accordingly, he submitted when no capital gain accrues, then no tax is payable thereon. 47. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is the duty and power of this Court to take into consideration all the subsequent events in the interest of justice and placed reliance on undernoted authorities: 27 I.T.As. No.4736, 5237 & 5238/DEL/2017…

ANANT RAJ LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

ITA 4736/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA; Ms
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50

…becomes null and void for reasons of subsequent events, no capital gains can accrue thereon. In support, reliance was placed on Vithalbhai P. Patel 236 ITR 1001 (Guj) and Anant Chunilal Kate v. ITO [2004] 267 ITR 482 (Bom) followed by Narang Overseas (P.) Ltd 111 ITD 1 (Mumbai) (SB). Accordingly, he submitted when no capital gain accrues, then no tax is payable thereon. 47. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is the duty and power of this Court to take into consideration all the subsequent events in the interest of justice and placed reliance on undernoted authorities: 27 I.T.As. No.4736, 5237 & 5238/DEL/2017…

NIRAJ OMPRAKASH PATIL,VASAI vs. ITO 4(3), THANE, THANE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3034/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…isappropriated to his wife’s account can not be treated as income. In defence of his arguments, the Ld. A.R. relied on a couple of decisions namely Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. M. Rajgopal 199 236 ITR 461 Madras HC, Narang Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (2008) 111 ITD 1 Mumbai (Spl. Bench). The Ld. A.R. also referred to the decision of US Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner vs. Will Cocks 327 US 2404 (1946). The Ld. A.R. finally prayed that in view of the underlying facts and in the light of the ratio laid down by the Shri Niraj Omprakash Patil & Smt. Arpita Niraj Patil Madras HC and other two decisions one…

ITO, WARD-40(1), KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. SHRI AMAL KUMAR GHOSH, KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 255/KOL/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 2(12)

…eived therefrom, together with interest on such profits, but shall not include profits due to improvements made by the person in wrongful possession.” We find that the Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Narang Overseas Pvt Ltd vs ACIT reported in 111 ITD 1 (Mum ITAT ) (SB) had held that mesne profits received by assessee for wrongful deprivation of use and occupation of property constitutes capital receipt and hence not chargeable to tax. Respectfully following the same, we hold that the ld CIT(A) had rightly granted relief to the assessee by holding that the receipt of Rs 90 lacs by the assessee is…

TRANS FREIGHT CONTAINERS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CIRCLE- 3 (3)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, the ground No.1 received by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3262/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S. Trans Freight Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Containers Ltd., Income Tax, 72-73, Nariman Bhavan Circle 3(3)(2), Room Nariman Point No.609, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400 021 M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaact1447P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue By Shri Amit Pratap Singh Date Of Hearing 18/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement 07/02/2020

Section 143(3)

…to the wrongful or unlawful possession of the property. The assessee placed reliance on the following decisions in support of its contentions before the ld. AO:- a. Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Narang Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT reported in 111 ITD 1 which was subsequently upheld by the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in appeal No.1791/2008. b. Decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Goodwill Theaters Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.8185/Mum/2011 dated 19/06/2013. c. Decision of Hon‟ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Annamma Alexander reported in 191 ITR 551 d. Decision of Hon‟ble Calcutta…

ITO, WARD-40(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI KAMAL KUMAR GHOSH,(DECEASED), KOLKATA

ITA 254/KOL/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & S. S. Godara, Jm M.A No.225/Kol/2018 & Ito, Ward-40(1), Kolkata Vs. Shri Kamal Kumar Ghosh (Deceased), Represented By L/H Sri Amal Kr. Ghosh 20, Hindustan Park, 208, Rash Bihari Avenue, Kol-09. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aecpg2896J (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Mihir Bandyopadhyay, AR
Section 2(12)Section 254(2)

…nce have received”. The same sufficiently indicates that the person is wrongful person has to pay and not receive the Mesne Profits. Our order in question appears to have followed this tribunal’s coordinate bench decision in Narang Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 111 ITD 1 (Mum ITAT) (SB) that mesne profits constitute a capital receipt not chargeable to tax and also hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in CIT vs. Smt. Lila Ghosh 205 ITR 9 (Cal) as relied upon by the CIT(A). Ld. Authorized Representative fails to dispute that none of the said two assessees had continued in possession of the respective properti…

SIGFRIEDE INFOTECH P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 10(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result the grounds of the appeal

ITA 7545/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Sigfriede Infotech Pvt. Ito-10(3)(3) Ltd. (Formerly Known As Aayakar Bhavan, Techstar Infotech (India) Pvt. Vs. M.K. Road, Ltd.) 156, Bhandup Village Mumbai-400020. Road, Next To Wmi Cranes Road, Bhandup, West Mumbai-400068. Pan: Aabct7637C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj Kushandwala-(Ar) Respondent By : Shri Sachchidanand Dube (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.05.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)-22 Mumbai, Dated 15Th Of October 2013 Which In Turn Arises From Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) On 12Th November

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &For Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…mmissioner (Appeals) was no exception. Therefore, the order of both the lower authorities on the issue deserves to be set-aside. The ld AR made reliance on the order of the Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in case of Narang Overseas Private Ltd Versus ACIT [111 ITD 1(SB), wherein question was framed “whether in the light of the decision in 232 ITR 2 it must be held that mess profit received by assessee is revenue income chargeable to tax.” The special bench passed the following order: 48. The above analysis clearly reveals that there is cleavage of opinion between High Courts. The Hon'ble Madras High Court…

M/S. FIRST ADVANTAGE GLOBAL OPERATING CENTER PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2813/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. C. Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…e held that computer software is eligible for 60% depreciation as against 25% granted by the AO. In this regard, the learned AR, inter alia, placed reliance on the decision of the ITAT-Delhi Special Bench in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (2008) 111 ITD 1112 (Delhi-Trib) (SB). 5.2 Per contra, the learned DR for Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below in restricting the depreciation on computer software to 25%. 5.3.1 We have heard and considered the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The issue for consideration before us is whether the assessee is entitle…

SETH PROPERTIES,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(3), MUMBAI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2991/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…and `49,86,226/- (Assessment Year 2008-09) received in respect of Unit L/40 in possession of M/s Hemkund Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. It was claimed that the impugned issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Narang Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT (111 ITD 1)(Mum. Trib.)(SB)(pages 23-53 of the paper book); ITA No.4623/Mum/2005, order dated 20/02/2008 and another decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Goodwill Theaters Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.8185/Mum/2011) dated 09/06/2013, which was affirmed by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in ITA No.2356 of 2013, order dated 06/06/2016. This…

DCIT, DEHRADUN vs. SH. RAMESH BATTA, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Cross

ITA 3966/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Dcit, Central Circle, Ramesh Batta, Dehradun. Vs. 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun.

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)(a)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 288ASection 292CSection 80C

…ted out that three High Courts viz. Hon’ble Delhi High Court, Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court have taken view in favour of assessee. Further, the Special Bench of Mumbai ITAT in the case of Narang Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (2008) 111 ITD 1 (Mum.-Trib.)(SB) has also taken a view in favour of assessee. 17. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. As per the mandate of section 153A, where a search has taken a place, the Assessing Officer, as per section 153A(1)(b) is required to assess or re-assess the total income of six assessmen…

COL. JASPAL SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6321/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

For Appellant: Sh. Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobina Chaudhari, Sr. DR

…income of Rs.3.28.260/- was I filed. Mesne profits of Rs. 10,75.365/- towards w rongful possession of property was I j treated as not taxable. Assessment proceedings Before the Assessing Officer, reliance was placed on Narang Overseas (P) Ltd. v. AC1T (2008) 111 ITD 1 (Mum-Special Bench). The Special Bench taking into consideration C1T v. P. Mariappa Gounder (1984) 147 ITR 676 (MadLand P. Mariappa Gounder v. C1T (1998) 232 1TR 2 (SC) has made following observations at page 20: Page 3 of 10 "In view of the these judgments, it cannot he said that in the ease of P. Mariappa Gounder (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Co…

ACIT 12(1), MUMBAI vs. SETH PROPERTIES, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3063/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos.3063 & 3064/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 The Acit 12(1), M/S. Seth Properties, बनाम/ Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Vs. Sandhana Rayon House, D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 01

For Appellant: Shri Sunil KumarFor Respondent: None
Section 24

…d 29/07/2003 did not mention any amount, or fix/determine any enhanced rent for M/s. Bank of Punjab or the assessee's 39 other tenants as erroneously assumed by the Assessing Officer. The Special Bench of the ITAT in the case of Narang Overseas(P)Ltd. v. ACIT 111 ITD 1, held that the amount was received against wrongful possession of the property and therefore the mesne profit received by the assessee under the consent decree awarded by the Apex Court at the rate of Rs. 10 lakhs was on account of damages for deprivation of use and occupation for the property and, therefore, the sum so received was capital in natu…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SPICE COMMUNICATION LTD., NOIDA

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 988/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, C.R. Building, New Delhi Sector-64, Noida. Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011 [In Ita No. 988/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, Sector-64, Noida. C.R. Building, New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Vs. Acit, Circle-50(1), New Delhi Sector-64, Noida Gir/Pan : Aaacb2100P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ronak G. Doshi, Ca Department By Sh. B.K. Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 25.05.2016 & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…he judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vector & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011 Shipping Services Private Limited reported in 357 ITR 642. He further, relying on the decision in the case of Narang Overseas Private Limited Vs. ACIT reported in 111 ITD 1 submitted that in case of diverging views, view favourable to assessee should be considered. 13.2 On the other and the Ld. CIT(DR) relying on the orders of the authorities below submitted that it was not possible to extend the roaming services without human intervention . 13.3 Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record including…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 801/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, C.R. Building, New Delhi Sector-64, Noida. Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011 [In Ita No. 988/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, Sector-64, Noida. C.R. Building, New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Vs. Acit, Circle-50(1), New Delhi Sector-64, Noida Gir/Pan : Aaacb2100P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ronak G. Doshi, Ca Department By Sh. B.K. Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 25.05.2016 & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…he judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vector & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011 Shipping Services Private Limited reported in 357 ITR 642. He further, relying on the decision in the case of Narang Overseas Private Limited Vs. ACIT reported in 111 ITD 1 submitted that in case of diverging views, view favourable to assessee should be considered. 13.2 On the other and the Ld. CIT(DR) relying on the orders of the authorities below submitted that it was not possible to extend the roaming services without human intervention . 13.3 Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record including…