DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JAY METAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

section 56(2)(iii) of the Act. Ld. DR further submitted that the AO rightly followed the provisions of the Act in disallowing

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 05 , DELHI vs. DEEPAK KOTHARI , KANPUR

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

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

iii) Pr.CIT and Anr. Vs. Dr. Ranjan Pai – (2021) 431 ITR 0250 (Karn.); and (iv) DCIT vs. Smt. Veena Goyal & Anr.- ITA No.75/JP/2020 & Anr. Dated 15.09.2020 (JP). 15. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observe that AO had invoked the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(c) of the Act by observing that assessee has received

DEEPAK KATHARI,KANPUR vs. ACIT, CC-5, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

iii) Pr.CIT and Anr. Vs. Dr. Ranjan Pai – (2021) 431 ITR 0250 (Karn.); and (iv) DCIT vs. Smt. Veena Goyal & Anr.- ITA No.75/JP/2020 & Anr. Dated 15.09.2020 (JP). 15. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observe that AO had invoked the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(c) of the Act by observing that assessee has received

CIT vs. SELECT HOLIDAY RESORTS PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the said rules"), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares'for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

CIT vs. SELECT HOLIDAY RESORTS PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the said rules"), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares'for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

EICHER LTD. vs. COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. HCL PEROT SYSTMES LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

EICHER LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed was restored to the assessing officer to be recomputed in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the said rules”), which was held to be retrospective. 5. As regards Question 1, it has been contended on behalf of the assessees that holding of shares for acquiring and retaining control of operating companies