“domestic company”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(22A) / ITR-6540 judgments

The decision most relied on for domestic company is CIT v. ITC Ltd. (236 Taxmann 612), cited in 108 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on domestic company

CIT v. ITC Ltd.

236 Taxmann 612 · 2016 · High Court

108

citing judgments

When computing deduction under Section 80IA, specifically for inter-unit transfer of power, the benefit cannot be claimed based on rates chargeable by distribution licensees to consumers. The deduction must be computed based on the rate fixed by the Tariff Regulation Commission for sale by electricity generating companies.

Sky High Appeal XLIII Leasing Company Ltd. v. ACIT

177 Taxmann.com 579 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Multilateral Instrument (MLI) does not become legally enforceable under domestic law without a specific notification under section 90(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for each affected Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited

395 ITR 247 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

Deduction under Section 80IA is allowable for captive power generation. The price for calculating this deduction is the rate at which the electricity board supplies power to its consumers, rather than the rate at which power generating companies supply to the electricity board.

Union of India v. Tata Tea Co Ltd.

398 ITR 260 · 2017 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) is a tax on the profits of the domestic company, not on the shareholder. The Supreme Court's decision in Tata Tea Co. Ltd. did not address the precise nature of DDT as a tax on the company versus the shareholder.

Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, Aurangabad

30 SOT 319 · 2009 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Tribunal may allow adjustments for differences between the tested party and comparable companies to eliminate material differences, provided accurate and credible evidence is furnished.

SwissRe Global Business Solutions India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

116 Taxmann.com 716 · 2020 · Reported

citing judgments

Working capital adjustment is an accepted adjustment provided for better comparability in transfer pricing. The Tribunal has held that working capital adjustment is necessary for better comparability.

ITO v. Strides Arcolab Ltd.

24 Taxmann.com 89 · 2012 · ITAT

citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A is applicable to investments made in shares of domestic companies but not foreign companies.

Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi Bank Ltd. v. CIT

108 Taxmann.com 242 · 2019 · High Court

citing judgments

A non-domestic company's Permanent Establishment (PE) in India cannot be taxed at a rate higher than that applicable to a domestic company carrying out the same activities, even considering retrospective amendments to tax treaties.

Judgments citing domestic company

Schaeffler India Limited (Earlier Known As Fag Bearings India Ltd.), Vadodara vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 134/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT D.R. & Shri

Section 234Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37Section 90(2)

DCIT vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 149 taxmann.com 332 (Mumbai-Tribunal) (SB) held that DTAA does not get triggered at all when a domestic company pays DDT under Section 115-O of the Act. Further, the Mumbai Special Bench held that when contracting States to a tax treaty intend ... extend treaty protection to domestic company paying dividend distribution tax, only then, domestic company can claim benefit of DTAA and not otherwise. While passing the order, the Mumbai Special Bench made the following observations:- “81. If domestic company has to enter the domain of DTAA, the countries should have agreed

Schaeffler India Limited (Earlier Known As Fag Bearings India Ltd.), Vadodara vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 133/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT D.R. & Shri

Section 234Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37Section 90(2)

ACIT-1(2)(1, Mumbai vs. Meriton Infotech Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 741/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Meriton Infotech Pvt. Ltd. G-4, Khetan Bhavan, Acit -1(2)(1) Ek Omkar Premises Co- Room No. 535, Aaykar Ops, Bhavan, Vs. 198, Jamshedji Tata Road, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecm4348N Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR

Section 101Section 115Section 115QSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

before 31st of May 2016. 014. According to the provisions of section 115QA of the income tax act if a domestic company distributes any amount on buyback of shares of unlisted shares from its shareholders, the domestic company is required to pay tax, which is an additional income ... company purchases its own shares in accordance with the provisions of section 77A of the companies act, such domestic companies are required to pay tax under section 115QA of the act. After 1/6/2016 if the company purchases its own shares in accordance with any of the provisions

M/S. Tata Elxsi Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 975/BANG/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80HSection 80I

construction of that section, the permissible deduction to be calculated with reference to the full amount of dividends received by the assessee from a domestic company or with reference to the dividend income computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, that is, after deducting the expenses paid ... deduction required to be allowed under Section 80-M must be calculated "with reference to the full amount of dividends received from a domestic company and not with reference to the dividend income as computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, that is after making deductions permissible under

M/S. Tata Elxsi Limited., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 927/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Kincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80H

that section, the permissible deduction is to be calculated with reference to the full amount of dividends received by the assessee from a domestic company or with reference to the dividend income computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, that is, after deducting the interest paid on monies ... deduction required to be allowed under Section 80-M must be calculated "with reference to the full amount of dividends received from a domestic company and not with reference to the dividend income as computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, that is, after making deductions provided under

Dy CIT 11 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Oil India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross

ITA 6997/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy&F Shri Amarjit Singhdy. Commissioner Of Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax-11(3)(1) 3Rd Floor, The Leela Room No. 204, Aayakar Galleria, Bhavan, M.K.Road, Andheri (E) Marine Lines Mumbai 400 059 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace2175M Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Ajay Kumar Sharma

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

clauses of clause (31) of section 2. By section 2(23A), a foreign company is defined to mean a company which is not a domestic company. Hence, any person responsible for paying to a non-resident, not being a company, or to a foreign company, any interest or any other

Asst CIT (Ltu) 1, Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Limited (As A Successor to Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1248/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR

Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

Total Oil India (P.) Ltd ([2023] 149 taxmann.com 332 (Mumbai - Trib.) (SB)) has held that DTAA does not get triggered at all when a domestic company pays DDT under section 115-O. Respectfully following these decisions we dismiss these additional grounds raised by the assessee. 46. Additional ground

Grasim Industries Limited (As A Successor to Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1065/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR

Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

Neptunus Power Plant Services Private Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2666/MUM/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Assessment Year 2021-22

Section 115BSection 139Section 143

15/3/2022 declaring total income of ₹ 63,748,840/– selecting the option of taxation under section 115BAA of the act. ii. assessee is a domestic company claims that it has opted for alternative tax regime under section 115BAA of the income tax act for assessment year 2021 – 22 iii. However, Assessee ... demands were raised. 05. Assessee preferred an appeal before national faceless appeal Centre against the above intimation. The fact shows that assessee is a domestic company claims that it has opted for alternative tax regime under section 115BAA of the income tax act for assessment year

Neptunus Power Plant Services Private Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 2796/MUM/2023[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2796/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Neptunus Power Plant बिधम/ Adit, Cpc Services Pvt. Ltd Bangalore. Vs. A-554, Ttc Industrial Area, Midc Navi Mumbai, Mahape, Thane-400710. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn9274A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Kartik Natarajan Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 14.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: -

For Appellant: Shri Kartik NatarajanFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 3

Neptunus Power Plant Services Pvt. Ltd. effect from 01/04/2020, for the purpose of granting benefit of reduced corporate tax rate for the domestic companies. In order to avail the benefit, such companies will have to exercise the option in the prescribed manner on or before the due date specified under ... after 1st day of April 2020. As per Rule 21AE of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, such option can be exercised by the domestic company in Form 10-IC in the manner prescribed under the said Rules. It is undisputed that for the relevant assessment year the due date

Nelco Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. RG. 15(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 3825/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 15(2)(1) Nelco Limited Room No.357, 2Nd Floor, El-6, Electronic Zone, Mahape, Navi Mumbai-400710 Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1983C

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50B

right to add, alter or amend to the above grounds of appeal” 03. Brief facts of the case shows that assessee is a domestic company engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of electrical products and real estate development. 04. Assessee filed its return of income on 30 September

Mumbai Shelter Housing Development Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2381/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Venugopal P. NairFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

appeal as occasion may arise or demand.” 3. The brief facts of the case as emanating from the record are: The assessee is a domestic company and is engaged in the business of builders and developers. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 30/09/2012

Mumbai Shelter Housing Development Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-(1) 3, Mumbai

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

ITA 2380/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Venugopal P. NairFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Sennheiser Electronics India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Circle-4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1942/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Us, The Only Effective Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Nfac Was Justified In Not Granting Refund Of The Dividend Distribution Tax (Ddt) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case. 4. We Have Heard The Rival Submissions & Perused The Materials Available On Record. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Sales & Distribution Of Headphones, Microphones, Monitoring Systems, Tour Guide Systems & Aviation Headsets. It Imports Goods From Sennheiser Group Companies For Reselling Through Its Distributors In India. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2019-20 Was Filed By The Assessee Company On 27.11.2019 Which Was Later Revised On 09.03.2020 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,77,00,470/-. 5. During The Year Under Consideration The Assessee Distributed Dividends To Its Share Holders (Senniheiser Global Operations Gmbh, Germany & Sennheiser Electronic Gmbh & Co. Kg

Section 115Section 143(1)

wherein it was held as under :- “83. For the reasons give above, we hold that where dividend is declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company to a non-resident shareholder(s), which attracts Page 3 of 6 Sennheiser Electronics India Vs. Circle – 4 (1) Additional Income ... Distributed Profits) referred to in sec.115-0 of the Act, such additional income tax payable by the domestic company shall be at the rate mentioned in section 115-O of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholders(s) as specified in the relevant

Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4867/MUM/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalstandard Chartered Bank Taxation Department, 23-25, M. G. Road, 3Rd Floor, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aabcs4681D ..... Appellant Vs. Ddit (Intl. Tax)-2(1) Scindia House, Ballard Estate, N. M. Marg, Mumbai-400 038 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Ld. DR

Section 14ASection 250Section 40

Article 26 of India-UK Tax Treaty and held that provision of section 40(a)(i) does not differentiate between foreign Company and a domestic company. The treatment in respect of person whose income is being computed remains the same irrespective of their residential status. Page

Van Ooord India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 5(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1686/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Van Oord India Pvt Ltd Acit Circle 5(3)(2) 201, 2Nd Floor, Central Aaykar Bhavan, Mk Road, Vs. Plaza, 166 Cst Road, Mumbai- 400020 Kalina, Mumbai- 400098

For Appellant: Shri. Divesh ChawlaFor Respondent: Shri. Ajay Kumar Sharma & Anil Sant

Section 250

extended to domestic clause, the benefit of DTAA can be extended to domestic clause, the benefit of DTAA can be extended to domestic company. If we look at the wordings in the In company. If we look at the wordings in the India Hungary DTAA, dia Hungary DTAA, what ... does not contain anything whereby the shareholders. The treaty does not contain anything whereby the shareholders. The treaty does not contain anything whereby the domestic company is protected by the DTAA an domestic company is protected by the DTAA and that the rate d that the rate mentioned therein shall

DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Total Energies Marketing India P Ltd (Formerly Known As M/S. Total Oil India P Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 97/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 40

assessee [2023] 149 taxmann.com 332 (Mumbai - Trib.) (SB) where in it has been held that DTAA does not get triggered at all when a domestic company pays DDT under section 115-O; where contracting states to a tax treaty intend to extend treaty protection to domestic company paying dividend distribution ... only then, domestic company can claim benefit of DTAA, if any. Further latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nestle SA [2023] 155 taxmann.com 384 (SC) [19-10-2023] . Page 11 of 11 Claim of the assessee is based on Concentrix Services Netherlands B.V. v. Income-tax Officer

DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Total Energies Marketing India P Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/S. Total Oil India P Ltd.), Mumbai

ITA 96/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 40

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur vs. Mesers South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee as well as revenue are either allowed, partly allowed for statistical purposes or dismissed, in accordance with our observations herein above

ITA 54/RPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.201/Bil/2012 (Ay : 2009-2010) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.401/Bil/2014 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.162/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Bil/2015 (Ay : 2011-2012) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.102/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2012-2013) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2013-2014) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Rpr/2017 (Ay : 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.169/Rpr/2018 (Ay : 2015-2016) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.33/Rpr/2019 (Ay : 2016-2017) South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Vs Jcit, Range-1, Bilaspur Seepat Road, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aadcs 2066 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Bil/2012 (Ay : 2009-2010) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.382/Bil/2014 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Bil/2015 (Ay : 2011-2012) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.98/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2012-2013) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.99/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2013-2014) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.188/Rpr/2017 (Ay : 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.171/Rpr/2018 (Ay : 2015-2016) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.54/Rpr/2019 (Ay : 2016-2017) Dcit, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur Vs South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Seepat Road, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aadcs 2066 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate, Shri Ankur Goel & Shri Ankit Agrawal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Debashish Lahiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/10/2023

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Korde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

period of the lease of land for mining,” 5.1 Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Public Sector Undertaking, a domestic company, in which the public are substantially interested. It is wholly owned subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. The assessee company is engaged in the activities

Mesers South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Bilaspur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee as well as revenue are either allowed, partly allowed for statistical purposes or dismissed, in accordance with our observations herein above

ITA 33/RPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Korde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR