BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

207 results for “disallowance”+ Section 256clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai882Delhi794Bangalore223Chennai217Kolkata207Ahmedabad202Jaipur181Cochin81Hyderabad60Surat59Raipur46Indore45Pune44Chandigarh43Lucknow35Nagpur31Cuttack26Visakhapatnam24Telangana21SC20Rajkot17Allahabad13Calcutta13Agra12Guwahati12Karnataka9Varanasi6Patna6Amritsar5Jabalpur3Jodhpur3Dehradun2Panaji2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Punjab & Haryana1Ranchi1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)79Section 26378Section 14760Addition to Income55Section 14A54Disallowance46Section 14839Deduction39Section 25026Section 68

UNITED BANK OF INDIA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, LTU - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 75/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.75/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) United Bank Of India Vs. Acit, Ltu-1, Kolkata. 16, Old Court House Street, Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacu5624P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 23, Kolkata’S Order Dated 08.06.2017 Passed In Case No.06/Cit(A)-23/L.T.U-1/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Learned Authorized Representative For Assessee & Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit-Dr Appearing At The Revenue’S Behest. 2. The Assessee’S First Substantive Grievance Challenges Correctness Of Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Disallowing Club Entrance Fees Of Rs.97,794/- In The Course Of Assessment Affirmed In The Lower In The Lower Appellate Proceedings. The Assessee Herein Is Admittedly A Bank Which Claimed The Impugned Expenditure As An Allowable Deduction Under Revenue Head. The Assessing Officer’S Assessment Order Dated 25.02.2015 Held The Same To Be Capital Expenditure Than Revenue In Nature. The Cit(A) Has Confirmed The Impugned Disallowance.

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 35D

Showing 1–20 of 207 · Page 1 of 11

...
26
Section 153A26
Reopening of Assessment15
Section 35D(1)(ii)
Section 35D(2)(c)

256 CTR 104 (Madras). We conclude in the foregoing factual and legal position that the assessee’s case comes u/s 35D(2)(ii) since in connection with extension of its undertaking only as evident from assessee’s foregoing factual details. The CIT(A)’s identical findings under challenge deleting impugned identical section 35D disallowance

KESORAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue as well that of assessee both are dismissed

ITA 1195/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrip.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Section 43(5) of the Act However. it appears that the decision of this court m CIT v Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. [2003] 261 ITR 256/ [2004] 134 Taxman 376 (Mum) was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal when it rendered its decision in S Vinod Kumar Diamonds (P) Ltd (supra). In the above case, this court

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue as well that of assessee both are dismissed

ITA 1776/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrip.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Section 43(5) of the Act However. it appears that the decision of this court m CIT v Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. [2003] 261 ITR 256/ [2004] 134 Taxman 376 (Mum) was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal when it rendered its decision in S Vinod Kumar Diamonds (P) Ltd (supra). In the above case, this court

JCIT, (OSD), CIR-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S JAY SHREE TEA & INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 737/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.736 & 737/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13) Jcit (Osd), Cir-4(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 10, Camac Street, Industry House, 15Th Floor, Kolkata – Kolkata – 700 069. 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacj 7788 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Chaturvedi, AR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A was based in the original assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act. Hence there is no ‘tangible material’ to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income. The reasons must have a live link with the formation M/s. Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. ITA Nos.736 & 737/Kol/2016 Assessment Years

JCIT, (OSD), CIR-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S JAY SHREE TEA & INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 736/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.736 & 737/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13) Jcit (Osd), Cir-4(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 10, Camac Street, Industry House, 15Th Floor, Kolkata – Kolkata – 700 069. 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacj 7788 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Chaturvedi, AR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A was based in the original assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act. Hence there is no ‘tangible material’ to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income. The reasons must have a live link with the formation M/s. Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. ITA Nos.736 & 737/Kol/2016 Assessment Years

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 462/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35(1)(i)Section 43BSection 56(2)(x)Section 80J

256 ITR 625, wherein it has been held that the date of registration is not decisive to ascertain the date of acquisition/ownership of the property. In defence of his argument, ld. A.R. stated that the ld. PCIT’s direction was unjustified and unlawful so far as the provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Act were

M/S MCC PTA INDIA CORPN. PVT. LTD.,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-59, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 151/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012
Section 11Section 194Section 194ISection 201(1)

disallowance of expenditure for non-deduction of TDS u/s. 194-I of the act, by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the act, on rent paid to Kolkata Port Trust (KPT). 3. Brief facts are that the assessee has claimed expenditure on account of rent paid to KPT at Rs.54,21,256

THE STATE FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1281/KOL/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Apr 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2005-06

Section 143(3)

disallowed it as allowance under section 37(1) of I.T. Act. Out of the entertainment, expenses, amounting to Rs.3865 incurred by the Directors of the assessee company, for entertainment at the Diners club and C.C.1, the I.T.O. regarded Rs.1365 only as permissible deduction under section 37(2) of I.T. Act, taking the view that the remaining sum of Rs.2500

M/S THE STATE FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 2,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 165/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

disallowed it as allowance under section 37(1) of I.T. Act. Out of the entertainment, expenses, amounting to Rs.3865 incurred by the Directors of the assessee company, for entertainment at the Diners club and C.C.1, the I.T.O. regarded Rs.1365 only as permissible deduction under section 37(2) of I.T. Act, taking the view that the remaining sum of Rs.2500

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

ITA 1048/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L.Saini, Am

For Appellant: DR. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 14ASection 92C

disallowed the claim. The Hon'ble High Court held that the assessee was not a dealer in foreign exchange and the foreign exchanges were only incidental to the assessee's regular course of business and the loss was thus not a speculative loss but incidental to the assessee's business and allowable as such. Facts in the present case

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

ITA 1047/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L.Saini, Am

For Appellant: DR. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 14ASection 92C

disallowed the claim. The Hon'ble High Court held that the assessee was not a dealer in foreign exchange and the foreign exchanges were only incidental to the assessee's regular course of business and the loss was thus not a speculative loss but incidental to the assessee's business and allowable as such. Facts in the present case

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

ITA 1049/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L.Saini, Am

For Appellant: DR. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 14ASection 92C

disallowed the claim. The Hon'ble High Court held that the assessee was not a dealer in foreign exchange and the foreign exchanges were only incidental to the assessee's regular course of business and the loss was thus not a speculative loss but incidental to the assessee's business and allowable as such. Facts in the present case

MANIPUR TEA CO. PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2692/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 2692/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-09

Section 14ASection 250

disallowance of remission of interest of Rs. 36,00,000 under the head of Income from Other Sources instead of Profit and Gains of Business and Profession as interest debit is under this head only. 2. That the DCIT has made an addition of Rs.56,36,381/- u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 191 by applying 2nd proviso

M/S MITRA GUHA BUILDERS (INDIA) CO.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA NO.1594/Kol/2014 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and C

ITA 1558/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri J.M.Thard, Advocate
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 201Section 40

section 36(1)(vii) of the Act and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited 323 ITR 397 (SC). 26. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) the revenue has raised ground no.2 before the Tribunal. 27. We have heard the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VATICAN COMMERCIAL LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2623/KOL/2013[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2017AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

disallowed under original assessment. " I.T.A. No. 2623/KOL./2013 Assessment Year: 2004-2005 Page 5 of 12 The Allahabad High Court in J.P. Bajpai (HUF) v. CIT [2004] 140 Taxman 34 held that the responsibility of the assessee is limited to the disclosure of all primary facts and nothing beyond. Once the assessee has disclosed all the primary facts that

DAS BRICK FIELD,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WD 2(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 283/KOL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 144Section 40A(3)

disallowance of Rs.5,74,256/- under section 40A(3) of the Act. 3. Against the order passed by the Assessing

SHRI KARTICK CHANDRA MONDAL ,HOOGHLY vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 8, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Dr. Shri P. K. Srihari, CIT/ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 54Section 54E

256(2) is to six calendar months and not one hundred and eighty days. In view of the above judgment in the case of Munnalal Shrikishan Mainpuri (supra), we are of the view that the term “Month” means calendar month (and not period of thirty days), which should be applied for the purpose of section 54EC

M/S. CLIFF TREXIM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

disallow and to bring to tax expenditure wrongly claimed by the assessee and allowed in original assessment. The said departmental appeal was dismissed on the proposition that the bar which applies to the assessing officer equally applies to the CIT, for the purposes of section 263 of the Act. c) The Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court

M/S. SPAN FOUNDATION PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2521/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

disallow and to bring to tax expenditure wrongly claimed by the assessee and allowed in original assessment. The said departmental appeal was dismissed on the proposition that the bar which applies to the assessing officer equally applies to the CIT, for the purposes of section 263 of the Act. c) The Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court

M/S. GARG BROTHERS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2519/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

disallow and to bring to tax expenditure wrongly claimed by the assessee and allowed in original assessment. The said departmental appeal was dismissed on the proposition that the bar which applies to the assessing officer equally applies to the CIT, for the purposes of section 263 of the Act. c) The Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court