Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT

443 ITR 250Supreme Court of India2022#4056 most cited

What is Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer has a duty to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if they are not claimed by the assessee in their return of income.

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT · 443 ITR 250 · Assessing Officer duty · grant benefits · reliefs during assessment · not claimed in ROI

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 144CSection 92CASection 115JAASection 144C(10)Section 234BSection 234D
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 153(a)(1)section 10b(8)section 144(3)section 158asection 153(a)section 35(1)(ii)section 44csection 153a(1)(a)section 80ia(8)section 144c(10)section 139(5)section 115jaa

Judgments citing Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT

Joshi Technologies International Inc India Projects, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT (Int. Taxa-1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 81/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 80I

…(SC) only binds the ‘assessing authority’ but does not impinge upon the powers of the Appellate authorities such as Tribunal and DRP, to entertain new claims. In this regard the Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i) Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT (2022) 443 ITR 250 (SC) ii) DCIT vs. Zydus Wellness Ltd. (2016) 76 taxmann.com 328 upheld by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in PCIT vs. Zydus Wellness Ltd. iii) Riddhi Steel & Tubes (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2013) 144 ITD 397 (Ahd.Tri.) The Ld. AR further submitted that the DRP held that PSC is retrospective in nature and assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 42 of…

Joshi Technologies International Inc India Projects, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT (Int. Taxa-1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 80/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 80I

…(SC) only binds the ‘assessing authority’ but does not impinge upon the powers of the Appellate authorities such as Tribunal and DRP, to entertain new claims. In this regard the Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i) Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT (2022) 443 ITR 250 (SC) ii) DCIT vs. Zydus Wellness Ltd. (2016) 76 taxmann.com 328 upheld by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in PCIT vs. Zydus Wellness Ltd. iii) Riddhi Steel & Tubes (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2013) 144 ITD 397 (Ahd.Tri.) The Ld. AR further submitted that the DRP held that PSC is retrospective in nature and assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 42 of…

Joshi Technologies International Inc India Projects, Ahmedabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle(Int.Taxn.)-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 244/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 80I

…(SC) only binds the ‘assessing authority’ but does not impinge upon the powers of the Appellate authorities such as Tribunal and DRP, to entertain new claims. In this regard the Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i) Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT (2022) 443 ITR 250 (SC) ii) DCIT vs. Zydus Wellness Ltd. (2016) 76 taxmann.com 328 upheld by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in PCIT vs. Zydus Wellness Ltd. iii) Riddhi Steel & Tubes (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2013) 144 ITD 397 (Ahd.Tri.) The Ld. AR further submitted that the DRP held that PSC is retrospective in nature and assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 42 of…

Te Connectivity Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT Circle, 7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1887/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: S/Shri Sriram Sheshadri & Vinay Jain, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Suganthamala T M, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 40Section 92C

…there is no bar in reducing the total income of the assessee less than the returned income in assessment. For this proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in IT(TP)A No.1887/Bang/2024 Page 10 of 14 the case of Wipro Finance Ltd. , 443 ITR 250 and also the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Karnataka State Co-op. Federation Ltd., 128 taxmann.com 1 and upon the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Perlo Telecommunications and Electronic Components India Pvt. Ltd. 2021 (10) TMI 236. 19. The ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of ld. lower authorities and…

Sunil Kumar Sinha, Lucknow vs. ITO-1(4), Lucknow -New, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 274/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Sunil Kumar Sinha V. The Ito-1(4) A-23, Vishnupuri Colony Lucknow - New Nahar Road, Near Shukla Chauraha Jankipuram, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Adpps6761A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Smt. Neelam Diman, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Diman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sunil Kumar Sinha v. The ITO-1(4) A-23, Vishnupuri Colony Lucknow - New Nahar Road, Near Shukla Chauraha Jankipuram, Lucknow TAN/PAN:ADPPS6761A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Smt. Neelam Diman, C.A. Respondent by: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 05.02.2025, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-4, Hyderabad for Assessment Yea…

Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC- 30, New Delhi

ITA 4492/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…ere Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 9. National Thermal Power Limited…

M/S Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5451/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…e Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) Page 16 of 63 ITA No. 5251 to 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14]; ITA No. 4492/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2014-15] M/s Jindal Photo LtdVs.The A.C.I.T CIT vs. Aspentech India 5. 6. CIT vs. Simon Ca…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5257/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…ere Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 9. National Thermal Power Limited…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5256/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…ere Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 9. National Thermal Power Limited…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5255/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…ere Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 9. National Thermal Power Limited…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5254/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…e Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) Page 16 of 63 ITA No. 5251 to 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14]; ITA No. 4492/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2014-15] M/s Jindal Photo LtdVs.The A.C.I.T CIT vs. Aspentech India 5. 6. CIT vs. Simon Ca…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5253/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…ere Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 9. National Thermal Power Limited…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5252/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…urts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. 2. 3. 4. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. CIT vs. Aspentech India CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) National Thermal Power Limite…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5251/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…ere Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 9. National Thermal Power Limited…

Strides Pharma Science Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 15(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5721/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5721/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2020-21) Strides Pharma Science Limited V/S. Ito 15(3)(2), बनाम Aayakar Bhavan, New 201, Devavrata, Sector-17, Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020 Vashi, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra-400703 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Blrs03808A .. Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Nishit Gandhi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Mr. R. A. Dhyani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 16.01.2025 20.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / Order Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Mumbai/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Dated 06.09.2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Mr. R. A. Dhyani
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 250Section 35Section 37(1)

…ant to the assessment order for 2017-18, this claim has been made for the first time before the Tribunal. He has, further, submitted that the same is admissible in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Wipro Finance Ltd. v/s CIT (2022) 443 ITR 250 (SC). E TAX APPELLATE TRIRAN Page | 23 ITA No. 5721/Mum/2024 Α.Υ. 2020-21 Strides Pharma Science Limited 12.2 Ld. DR, on the other hand, has argued that the issue does not arise out of assessment order, and therefore, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the same at the time of deciding the first appeal. 12.3 We have considered the rival submissions.…

Naresh Kumar Kamboj, Zirakpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Panchkula

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 337/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Pandey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 143(1)

…ue interest. 4. The learned National Faceless CIT(A) erred in not considering additional claim of appellant wherever there is no bar on appellate authorities to consider the claim of assessee. We have relied upon the decision Wipro Finance Ltd. Vs. CIT [2022] 443 ITR 250 (SC) wherein Apex Court allowed the additional claim of assessee which was first claimed at Tribunal. In CIT Vs. Jaiparabolic Springs Ltd it was held that the appellate authorities have power to allow relief to assessee which was otherwise entitled even though no claim was made by assessee in the return. So, income of23,72,554 (Rs. 21,18,827 for…

M/S. Bandhan Bank Ltd. (Erstwhile Ghosh Finance Ltd), Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 465/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Biswanath Paul, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 17(2)(vi)Section 192Section 250Section 37

…l submissions and perused the material available on record. As regards admission of the additional claim before the appellate authorities, the assessee also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Wipro Finance Ltd. Vs. CIT [2022] 443 ITR 250 (SC) and also the order of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in ITA No. 370/Kol/2022. It was submitted before us as under: 2. The short question of law raised in the appeal is whether an additional or fresh claim of deduction can be made in course of assessment proceedings under Section 143 of the Act, when such claim was not part of the o…

Commissioner of Income Ta, Kolkata - II vs. M/S. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corpn. L

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA/331/2008HC Calcutta01 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 1St May 2024. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate … For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Smt. Smita Das De, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Ananda Sen, Learned Counsel For The Respondent Assessee. 2.

Section 43BSection 43D

…duction. We hold and direct accordingly and allow the grounds raised by the assessee in this regard.” 8. We find that the controversy is squarely covered by a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Wipro Industries Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2022] 443 ITR 250 (SC) in which Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- “10. The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Department had faintly argued that since the appellant in its return 6 had taken a conscious explicit plea with regard to the part of the claim being ascribable to capital expenditure and partly to revenue expenditure, it was not…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-2, Kolkata vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corp. Ltd

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA/1/2018HC Calcutta01 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 1St May 2024. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate … For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Smt. Smita Das De, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Ananda Sen, Learned Counsel For The Respondent Assessee. 2.

Section 43BSection 43D

…duction. We hold and direct accordingly and allow the grounds raised by the assessee in this regard.” 8. We find that the controversy is squarely covered by a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Wipro Industries Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2022] 443 ITR 250 (SC) in which Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- “10. The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Department had faintly argued that since the appellant in its return 6 had taken a conscious explicit plea with regard to the part of the claim being ascribable to capital expenditure and partly to revenue expenditure, it was not…

Sh. Martin Ekka S/O Sh. Lalsay Ekka, Panchkula vs. ITO, Ward -1, Panchkula

In the result, the ground no

ITA 281/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 143(1)

…ue interest. 4. The learned National Faceless CIT(A) erred in not considering additional claim of appellant wherever there is no bar on appellate authorities to consider the claim of assessee. We have relied upon the decision Wipro Finance Ltd. Vs. CIT [2022] 443 ITR 250 (SC) wherein Apex Court allowed the additional claim of assessee which was first claimed at Tribunal. In CIT Vs. Jai parabolic Springs Ltd it was held that the appellate authorities have power to allow relief to assessee which was otherwise entitled even though no claim was made by assessee in the return. So, income of 23,72,554 (Rs. 21,18,827 fo…

Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT (443 ITR 250) — Cited in 29 Judgments | BharatTax