Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India

6 SCC 613Supreme Court of India2012#418 most cited

What is Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India authority for?

Tax planning is legitimate only if it is within the framework of law. Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning, and it is wrong to encourage avoiding tax through dubious methods.

216

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vodafone International Holdings v. Union of India · substance over form · tax planning · colourable devices · avoiding tax · dubious methods · McDowell · 1985 3 SCC 230 · 2012 6 SCC 613

Also reported as

17 Taxmann.com 202204 Taxmann 408

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 147Section 148Section 131(1A)Section 132Section 251

Issues it is cited on

place of effective managementsection 6(3)section 9(1)(ii)section 127(1)section 80absection 73substance over formtreaty benefitslegal expensesddtclarificatory amendmentazadi bachao andolan

Judgments citing Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India

M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi - III

Appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms

C.A. No.-004742-004743 - 2021Supreme Court11 Aug 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

Section 43B

…ity in the language of Explanation 3C shall be resolved in favour of the assessee as per Cape Brandy Syndicate v. Inland Revenue Commissioner (supra) as followed by judgments of this Court – See Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India, (2012) 6 SCC 613 at paras 60 to 70 per Kapadia, C.J. and para 333, 334 per Radhakrishnan, J. 25. The High Court judgment dated 18th May, 2015, is clearly in error in concluding that ‘interest’, on the facts of this case, has been converted into a loan. There is no basis for this finding - as a matter of fact, it is directly contrary to the finding on fa…

M/S Singhi and Co vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax VIII

ITA/15/2020HC Calcutta27 Apr 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

…hip / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19. Further, it is submitted that "control" is a "right". "In any manner" in…

DCIT - 11(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Samanta Organics P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 3229/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.3229 To 3231/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Dcit-11(1)(2) बिधम/ M/S. Samanta Organics Pvt. Room No.1, Ground Floor, Ltd. Vs. M. K. Road, Aayakar 194, Arvind Chambers, Off, Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Western Express Highway, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400069. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs2099B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri T. S. Khalsa (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/02/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/04/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 18, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2009-10 To 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T. S. Khalsa (Sr. AR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.3229 to 3231/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) DCIT-11(1)(2) बिधम/ M/s. Samanta Organics Pvt. Room No.1, Ground Floor, Ltd. Vs. M. K. Road, Aayakar 194, Arvind Chambers, Off, Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Western Express Highway, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400069. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AADCS2099B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri T. S. Khalsa (Sr. AR) Assessee by: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing:…

Tcg Life Sciences Pvt Ltd vs. Joint Comm of Income Tax Range59 Kol and Anr

ITA/26/2020HC Calcutta04 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

…hip / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19. Further, it is submitted that "control" is a "right". "In any manner" in…

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

C.A. No.-008733-008734 - 2018Supreme Court02 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

…is underscored by this judgment, stating that the charging and machinery provisions contained in sections 9 and 195 of the Income Tax Act are interlinked. 56. This conclusion is also echoed in Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India, (2012) 6 SCC 613, wherein the following observations were made on the scope and applicability of section 195 of the Income Tax Act: “171. Section 195 casts an obligation on the payer to deduct tax at source (“TAS”, for short) from payments made to non- residents which payments are chargeable to tax. Such payment(s) must have an element of income embedded in it…

M/S.Carbon and Chemicals (India) Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Incometax, Kochi

ITR/70/2000HC Kerala01 Mar 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

For Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX
Section 143(1)(a)Section 201Section 256(1)Section 41(1)Section 41(1)(a)

…e definite purpose and it must be limited to the purpose for which it was created and should not be extended beyond that legitimate field. Explaining the scope of legal fictions, in the decision in Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India, [(2012) 6 SCC 613], it was held that the legal fiction has a limited scope and cannot be expanded by giving a purposive interpretation to the same, particularly if the result of such interpretation is to transform the concept of chargeability. 15. It is true that income tax is a portion of the profits payable to the State and the tax payable is n…

M/S. Joy Global (Uk) Limited, (Formerly Knows As Joy Mining Machinery Limited), Kolkatta vs. The ACIT (Int. Taxn.)-2, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2891/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2891/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 M/S Joy Global(Uk) Limited, A.C.I.T., (Formerly Known As Joy Mining Vs. International Taxation)-2, Machinery Limited) Ahmedabad. C/O Joy Global (India) Ltd.,, 85/1, Topsia Road (South), Kolkata-700046. Pan: Aaccj3893R

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT.D.R
Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 9(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 2891/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 M/s Joy Global(UK) Limited, A.C.I.T., (formerly known as Joy Mining Vs. International Taxation)-2, Machinery Limited) Ahmedabad. C/o Joy Global (India) Ltd.,, 85/1, Topsia Road (South), Kolkata-700046. PAN: AACCJ3893R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.R Rev…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Kesoram Industries Ltd

ITAT/17/2020HC Calcutta13 Jan 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

…hip / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19. Further, it is submitted that "control" is a "right". "In any manner" in…

Shweta Chhawchharia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-12

ITAT/15/2020HC Calcutta21 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

…hip / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19. Further, it is submitted that "control" is a "right". "In any manner" in…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2, Kolkata vs. Electrocast Sales India Ltd

ITAT/11/2020HC Calcutta18 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

…hip / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19. Further, it is submitted that "control" is a "right". "In any manner" in…

Essar House Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (Cir) 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1930/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Essar House Ltd., Asst Cit (Cir) 6(2)(2), Essar House, R.No.504, 5Th Floor, 11 K.K. Marg, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mahalaxmi, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 034 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacj2883P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R. Revenue By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.01.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Various Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. The Cit (A) Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Interest Amount Payable Towards Defeasance Of Sales Tax Liability Amounting To Rs.226,07,45,800. 2. The Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That Interest Liability Cannot Be Treated As Expenditure Incurred For The Purpose Of Earning Or Making Income By Way Of Discounting Charges On The Zero Coupon Bonds (Zcbs) & Consequently , The Same Is Not Eligible For Deduction U/S 57(Iii) Of The Act Against The Income By Way Of Discounting Charges On Zcbs. 3. The Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Transaction Is Not A Bonafide In Nature & Interest Liability Was Arisen From Adoption Of A Colorable Device By The Appellant For Avoidance Of Tax.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.R
Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Essar House Ltd., Asst CIT (CIR) 6(2)(2), Essar House, R.No.504, 5th Floor, 11 K.K. Marg, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mahalaxmi, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 034 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACJ2883P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R. Revenue by : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.R. Date of Hearing : 23.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 11.12.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The…

Augustus Capital Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 8084/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla[A.Y 2015-16] Augustus Capital Pte Ltd Vs. The Dy.C.I.T 24, Raffles Place Circle 1(1) 10-5, Clifford Centre International Taxation Singapore New Delhi Pan: Aabcg 4223 D [Appellant] [Respondent] Assessee By : Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Adv Shri K.M. Gupta, Adv Shri Rishab Malhotra Revenue By : Shri Satpal Gulati, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(i)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2015-16] Augustus Capital PTE Ltd Vs. The Dy.C.I.T 24, Raffles Place Circle 1(1) 10-5, Clifford Centre International Taxation Singapore New Delhi PAN: AABCG 4223 D [Appellant] [Respondent] Assessee by : Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Adv Shri K.M. Gupta, Adv Shri Rishab Malhotra Revenue by : Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 12.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 15.10.2020 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appe…

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/3/2020HC Telangana25 Aug 2020

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

…hip / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19. Further, it is submitted that "control" is a "right". "In any manner" in…

Shiv Raj Gupta vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi IV

C.A. No.-012044-012044 - 2016Supreme Court22 Jul 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

…ssing Officer and the order of the first learned Judicial Member and adopted the reasoning contained therein. According to him, the High Court judgment correctly applied both McDowell (supra) and Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India (2012) 6 SCC 613 to arrive at the result which it arrived at as it was clear that the amount of INR 6.6 crores that was received by the assessee was really in the nature of payment for the sale of shares. He also argued as an alternative that in any event it would fall under Section 28 (ii)(a) as was correctly held by the learned Assessing Officer and the mino…

M/S. Joy Global (Uk) Limited, (Formerly Knows As Joy Mining Machinery Limited), Kolkatta vs. The DCIT (Int. Taxn.)-2, Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2008/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar & Parin ShahFor Respondent: Shri Subhash Bains, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 195(2)Section 244ASection 44D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. Nos: 2303/AHD/2017 & 2008/AHD/2018 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/s Joy global (UK) Ltd. V/S Income Tax Officer, Circle- (Formerly Joy Mining 1(1), Ahmedabad Mahinery Ltd. or JMML) C/o Joy Global (India) Ltd. 85/1 Topsia Road (South) Kolkata 700046 West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AACCJ 3893R Appellant by : Shri S.N. Soparkar & Parin Shah Respondent by : Shri Subhash Bains, CIT/DR (आदेश)/ORDER Date of hearing : 03 -12-2019 Date of Pro…

Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 788/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

…I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 Tata Metaliks Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA Before: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Tata Metaliks Ltd. Appellant [PAN: AABCT1389B] Vs DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Respondent/Revenue & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Respondent/Revenue Vs Tata Metaliks Ltd. Appellant [PAN: AABCT1389B] For the Appellant : Shri Ashish Agarwal & Ms. Neha Jhunjhunwala, AR For the R…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 1143/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

…I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 Tata Metaliks Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA Before: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Tata Metaliks Ltd. Appellant [PAN: AABCT1389B] Vs DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Respondent/Revenue & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Respondent/Revenue Vs Tata Metaliks Ltd. Appellant [PAN: AABCT1389B] For the Appellant : Shri Ashish Agarwal & Ms. Neha Jhunjhunwala, AR For the R…

M/S Wevin Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Incometax Officer Ward-7(1)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 2710/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.2710/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S.Wevin Pvt. Ltd. No.143-E, 1St & 2Nd Phase, Bommasandra Industrial Area, Bengaluru-560099. … Appellant Pan: Aaacw1349M Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 7(1)(4), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant By : Shri Padamchand Khincha, Ca. Respondent By : Shri C.Sundar Rao, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20/03/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2019 O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.2710/Bang/2017 (Assessment year: 2013-14) M/s.Wevin Pvt. Ltd. No.143-E, 1st & 2nd Phase, Bommasandra Industrial Area, Bengaluru-560099. … Appellant PAN: AAACW1349M Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 7(1)(4), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant by : Shri Padamchand Khincha, CA. Respondent by : Shri C.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 20/03/2019 Date of pronouncement: 12/06/2019 O R D E R Per PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the…

ACIT, Cir-4, Kolkata vs. M/S R. K. Commercial Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1330/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jun 2019AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1330/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2007-08)

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Advocate & Shri Sujoy Sen, Advocate
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1330/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2007-08) DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata Vs. M/s R.K. Commercial Ltd. 41, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata- 700001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCR 2036 D (Assessee) .. (Revenue) Assessee by : Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT DR Respondent by : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Advocate & Shri Sujoy Sen, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 10/04/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 04/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned appeal filed by the…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1481/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No.1153 & 1481/Kol/2017 Assessment Year :2011-12 Tata Metaliks Ltd. V/s. Income Tax Officer Tata Centre, 10th Floor, Ward-3(2), Aayakar Bhavan, 4th Floor, P-7, 43 Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkat-71 Chowriinghee Square, [PAN No.AABCT 1389 B] Kolakta-69 DCIT, Circle-3(1), M/s Tata Metaliks Ltd., P-7, Chowringhee Square, 43, Chowringhee Road, Aayka Bhawan, 4th Floor, V/s. Kolkata-71 Room No.19, Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"…