THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

292B. 17. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Silver Line reported in (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi considering the objections raised by the revenue inasmuch as ITAT permitting the assessee to raise the point concerning non-issuance of notice under Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

292B. 17. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Silver Line reported in (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi considering the objections raised by the revenue inasmuch as ITAT permitting the assessee to raise the point concerning non-issuance of notice under Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

292B. 17. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Silver Line reported in (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi considering the objections raised by the revenue inasmuch as ITAT permitting the assessee to raise the point concerning non-issuance of notice under Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

292B. 17. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Silver Line reported in (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi considering the objections raised by the revenue inasmuch as ITAT permitting the assessee to raise the point concerning non-issuance of notice under Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

292B. 17. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Silver Line reported in (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi considering the objections raised by the revenue inasmuch as ITAT permitting the assessee to raise the point concerning non-issuance of notice under Section

M/S. HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

292B. 17. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Silver Line reported in (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi considering the objections raised by the revenue inasmuch as ITAT permitting the assessee to raise the point concerning non-issuance of notice under Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI I MAHABALESHWARAPPA

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

292B of the Act. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions in 7 'PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI VS. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., (2019) 107 TAXMANN.COM 375 (SC), 'SKY LIGHT HOSPITALITY LLP VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 28(1), NEW DELHI, (2018) 90 TAXMANN.COM 413 (DEL), 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 vs. M/S YESHODA ELECTRICALS

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

292B of the Act which provides for cure of any mistake, defect or omission in such notice"? (2) "Whether the order passed by Tribunal is perverse in law as Tribunal has failed to observe that re- assessment order passed in present case is valid since assessee failed to raise the issue of immediately on receipt of notice under section

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER vs. M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR (P) LTD

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

292B of the Act which provides for cure of any mistake, defect or omission in such notice"? (2) "Whether the order passed by Tribunal is perverse in law as Tribunal has failed to observe that re- assessment order passed in present case is valid since assessee failed to raise the issue of immediately on receipt of notice under section