SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

disallowed\nu/s 37(1) of the Act. It is submitted that section 44AD starts with a non-obstante\nclause and provides that “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained\nin sections 28 to 43C

MUKESH SONI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

disallowance/ addition u/s 68 of the IT Act. Reliance is placed in this regard on various judgments mentioned in the annexed list forming part of judicial pronouncements herewith :- 14. It is respectfully submitted that it is an established fact that only cash credits can be considered u/s. 68 and not trade receipts. In this regard the appellant craves leave

AKSH OPTIFIBRE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, ALWAR

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

disallowed that claim, that view was upheld..........\n28. This court notices that there are not less than 100 instances. For instance. Section\n35A. 35AB (3), 35ABB, 35D (5): 35DDA; 358; 41 (1) (Any benefit accrued by the\namalgamated co.) from cessation of liability of amalgamating company shall be taxed in\nthe hands of the amalgamated company