OIL INDIA LTD.,DIBRUGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE -2, DIBRUGARH

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

OIL INDIA LTD.,DIBRUGARH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE -2, DIBRUGARH

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, DIBRUGARH. vs. OIL INDIA LTD., DIBRUGARH

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, DIBRUGARH. vs. OIL INDIA LTD., DIBRUGARH

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

OIL INDIA LTD.,,DIBRUGARH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, DIBRUGARH.

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH vs. OIL INDIA LTD., DIBRUGARH

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH vs. OIL INDIA LTD., DIBRUGARH

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

OIL INDIA LTD.,DIBRUGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, DIBRUGARH

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

71,017/-, ₹1572,02,31,395/-, ₹1626,49,31,357/- and 186,677,04,350/-; assessment year-wise respectively. 3. Learned representative(s) inform us very fairly that the Revenue’s four appeal(s) in assessment year(s) 2003-04 to 2006-07 arise against the CIT(A)’s common order holding the taxpayer as eligible for sec. 80IB deduction

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD.,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

gain precedence over the AS—9. (G) That, the principle of res-judcata is not applicable to income tax proceedings. (H) That the judgments relied upon by the assessee pertain to period prior to amendment made in section 145 of the Act. 14. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the relevant material placed before us as well

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD.,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

gain precedence over the AS—9. (G) That, the principle of res-judcata is not applicable to income tax proceedings. (H) That the judgments relied upon by the assessee pertain to period prior to amendment made in section 145 of the Act. 14. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the relevant material placed before us as well

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED, NAHARLAGUN

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91

JUD CEMENT LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE - SHILLONG , SHILLONG

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED, NAHARLAGUN

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED, NAHARLAGUN

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

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

2. Learned senior counsel states at bar that the first assessee M/s SMS Smelters Ltd. no more wishes to press for its four appeals ITA No..93- 96/Gau/2017. The Revenue has not raised any objection. These four assessee’s appeal(s) are dismissed as withdrawn therefore. 3. We now advert to Revenue’s appeal(s) ITA No.91