ACIT, KOTA vs. SHIV AGREVO LTD., BARAN

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

68,17,23/- and assessed total income of the assessee at Rs. 6,01,59,367/- against the income declaring at Rs. 5,54,77,644/-. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, partly allowed the 3 ACIT, Kota vs. M/s Shiv Agrevo Ltd., Baran

GILLETTE INDIA LIMITED,SPA-65A, INDUSTRIAL AREA, BHIWADI, DISTRICT- ALWAR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-1, JAIPUR

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

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

801C by the assessee should have been disallowed by the AO. 17. As discussed above, the Assessing Officer failed to apply his mind on the material available on record and failed to invoke the applicable provisions of law. This in turn has resulted in passing of an erroneous order by the Assessing Officer in the case due to non-application