MPHASIS LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the concerned assessment year. However, where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action can be taken under section 147 after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CANARA BANK

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

207 OF 2019 C/W ITA No. 208 OF 2019 depreciation in value of investment in HTM Securities ignoring the fact that HTM Securities are treated as stock-in-trade by the assessee-bank and depreciation has been claimed in all the assessment years? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right

M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

207 Taxman 216 (Delhi) CIT vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd., (3) (1976) 105 ITR 864 (All) J K Synthetics vs. ITO (4) (2012) 210 Taxman 432 (Guj.) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Asstt.) vs. Mastek Ltd., (5) (1973) 87 ITR 539 (SC) Raza Textiles Ltd., vs. Income Tax Officer, Rampur (6) (2003) 128 Taxman 190 Hemalatha Gargya