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.

43 results for “house property”+ Section 36(1)(viii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi753Karnataka500Mumbai472Bangalore230Ahmedabad134Jaipur130Chandigarh117Cochin80Indore79Chennai70Calcutta53Hyderabad46Kolkata43Pune34Telangana34Lucknow30Raipur30Guwahati21Rajkot20Nagpur20Cuttack14SC14Agra13Visakhapatnam11Amritsar8Surat7Patna7Rajasthan6Varanasi6Kerala5Orissa3Jodhpur3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Panaji1J&K1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Ranchi1Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 80I33Section 143(3)31Section 6824Section 14A23Addition to Income22Long Term Capital Gains14Deduction13Disallowance13Section 25012

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOUTH CITY PROJECTS (KOLKATA) LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 36(1)(iii)

properties Pvt. Ltd. [“AAIPL”]. 3. Facts in brief are that, the assessee is a company engaged in the business of Real Estate Development and maintenance service of commercial area let out to various tenants. The assessee had filed return of income during the year declaring total income of Rs. 46,89,36,410/-. The case of the assessee was selected

M/S BALMER LAWRIES & CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(IT) WD-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2079/KOL/2014[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2016AY 2012-2013

Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. V/S. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 21, N.S.Road, (International Taxation), Kolkata-700 001 Ward-1(1), Aayakar [Pan No. Aabcb 0984 E] Bhawan (Poorva), 2Nd Floor, R. No.215, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata- 700 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri M.K.Poddar, Sr-Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.P.Bhatia, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-02-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3

Section 14712
Section 14811
Section 26311
Bench:
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 5(2)(b)

viii. It is clearly understood between the Appellant Company and the overseas entity providing logistic services overseas that the actual profit made by the Appellant Company, after deducting the logistic expenses, incurred overseas by and reimbursable to the overseas entity, on actual basis, from the amount actually receivable from the Indian exporter for arranging such export, would be shared

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

ITA 1489/KOL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C

36. It was submitted that in the case of the Assessee, GRSE has not gained any technical knowledge, skill, etc. as a result of service provided to it, which can be subsequently utilized by it. Thus, payments made by it, for services provided do not fall within the scope of FTS, as laid out in Article

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

ITA 2082/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C

36. It was submitted that in the case of the Assessee, GRSE has not gained any technical knowledge, skill, etc. as a result of service provided to it, which can be subsequently utilized by it. Thus, payments made by it, for services provided do not fall within the scope of FTS, as laid out in Article

DCIT/ACIT, LTU-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. UNITED BANK OF INDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed whereas the cross-objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 806/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2011-12 D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T, Ltu-1, Kolkata........................................................................................Appellant 6Th Floor, Kendriya Utpad Shulk Bhawan, 180, Shantipally, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata – 700 107. M/S. United Bank Of India……………………………………………………............................Respondent 16, Old Court House Street, Dalhousie, Kolkata – 700 107 [Pan : Aaacu 5624 P] C.O. No. 47/Kol/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 806/Kol/2017) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. United Bank Of India…………………………………………………….......................Cross-Objector 16, Old Court House Street, Dalhousie, Kolkata – 700 107 [Pan : Aaacu 5624 P] D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T, Ltu-1, Kolkata....................................................................................Respondent 6Th Floor, Kendriya Utpad Shulk Bhawan, 180, Shantipally, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata – 700 107. Appearances By: Shri I. Jamir, Cit, Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) – 17, Kolkata Dated 22.12.2016 & The Same Is Being Disposed Of Along With The Cross-Objection Filed By The Assessee Being C.O. No. 47/Kol/2017. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In Its Appeal Read As Under:

Section 115JSection 1ISection 2(5)Section 211

House Street, Dalhousie, Kolkata – 700 107 [PAN : AAACU 5624 P] D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T, LTU-1, Kolkata....................................................................................Respondent 6th Floor, Kendriya Utpad Shulk Bhawan, 180, Shantipally, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata – 700 107. Appearances by: Shri I. Jamir, CIT, DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate appearing on behalf of the Assessee Date of concluding the hearing : February

M/S. KALYAN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,BUDBUD, BURDWAN (EAST) vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 106/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 106/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 M/S. Kalyan Educational Society,..............Appellant Budbud Bye Pass (North), Distg. Bardhaman-713403 [Pan: Aabtk2860K] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-2, Durgapur, Aayakar Bhawan, Durgapur, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Smt. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250

property has to be computed oncommercial principles by virtue of Circular No. 5-P(LXX-6) of 1968, dated 19-6-1968. (5) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the delayin filing the return of income and Form 10B was due to firebreakout in the office of the society where records werekept and outbreak of the pandemic

M/S ADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RG-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1281/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1281 /Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D.Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr.Dr
Section 143(3)Section 80I

property which in the opinion of the Engineer-In -Charge are due to the negligence of the contractor, are promptly rectified by the contractor at: their own cost and expenses and! According to the direction and satisfaction of the Engineer-In ·-Charge. viii. As per the contract the assessee is not supposed to sublet / assign any portion of the work

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1211/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 263

house projects, barrack projects, health centre project and other. Since, the projects awarded to the assessee were government project, the assessee after looking into the size and nature of business of the company gave labour contract for Hard Rock Chiselling using rock hammers and chisels, stacking on road side for pipe line trenches, carting excess earth and other similar labour

M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1228/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 263

house projects, barrack projects, health centre project and other. Since, the projects awarded to the assessee were government project, the assessee after looking into the size and nature of business of the company gave labour contract for Hard Rock Chiselling using rock hammers and chisels, stacking on road side for pipe line trenches, carting excess earth and other similar labour

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 233/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

VIII, Kolkata in appeal Nos. 294/CIT(A)-VIII/Kol/09-10 for AY 2007-08 dated 18.11.2011 and ITA No.246/CIT(A)-VIII/10-11 for AY 2008-09 dated 27.04.2012. Assessments were framed separately by DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata u/s.143(3) of the ITA Nos. 233 & 1041/Kol/2012 Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd.. AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 230/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

VIII, Kolkata in appeal Nos. 294/CIT(A)-VIII/Kol/09-10 for AY 2007-08 dated 18.11.2011 and ITA No.246/CIT(A)-VIII/10-11 for AY 2008-09 dated 27.04.2012. Assessments were framed separately by DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata u/s.143(3) of the ITA Nos. 233 & 1041/Kol/2012 Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd.. AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

DCIT, CIRCLE -8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1041/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

VIII, Kolkata in appeal Nos. 294/CIT(A)-VIII/Kol/09-10 for AY 2007-08 dated 18.11.2011 and ITA No.246/CIT(A)-VIII/10-11 for AY 2008-09 dated 27.04.2012. Assessments were framed separately by DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata u/s.143(3) of the ITA Nos. 233 & 1041/Kol/2012 Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd.. AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1030/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

VIII, Kolkata in appeal Nos. 294/CIT(A)-VIII/Kol/09-10 for AY 2007-08 dated 18.11.2011 and ITA No.246/CIT(A)-VIII/10-11 for AY 2008-09 dated 27.04.2012. Assessments were framed separately by DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata u/s.143(3) of the ITA Nos. 233 & 1041/Kol/2012 Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd.. AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MAA AMBA INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1309/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1309/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Maa Amba Infrastructure (P) Ltd. [Pan: Aaecm 6507 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, AR
Section 143(3)Section 22

viii) Jai Trading, (ix) Bidyut Ghosh and (x) Hatsun Agro Products Limited during the year. The assessee claimed such rent from the said warehouse under the head ‘income from business or profession’ being the owner of warehouse (building). The ld AO observed that the rented area / portion of the building has not been used by the assessee for the purpose

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

viii) ITO vs Yasin Moosa Godil (20 taxmann.com 424) (ITAT Ahmedabad) (ix) ACIT vs. Nadir Nazarali Dhanani (ITA No. 100/Mum/2013) (ITAT Mum); (x) Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010) (ITAT Mum); (xi) ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR 137); (xii) ITO -vs.- Pradeep Steel Re-rolling Mills (P.) Ltd (155 TTJ 294). 9 Britannia Industries Limited

ROHIT JALAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2205/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2205/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

Properties Private Limited [ITA No. 105 of 2016] (Cal HC) – In this case the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court affirmed the decision of this tribunal , wherein, the tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee where the AO did not accept the explanation of the assessee in respect of his transactions in alleged penny stocks. The Tribunal found that

D.C.I.T CC - XXVIII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SPML INFRA LTD (ERSTWHILE M/S SUBHAS PROJECTS& MARKETING LTD), KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1291/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 80Section 80l

36(b), page 234) (ix) Operation & Maintenance of the system: As per scope of work on page 150, the assessee was responsible for proper operation of the installations for 2 years. Further it was to maintain the system in good order for 1 yr [see page 210 clause (f)] B. Investment: In order to undertake the said project the assessee

I.T.O.(EXEMPTION), WARD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHREE SARDARSHAHR GAUSHALA SAMITY, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and the cross-objection are dismissed

ITA 402/KOL/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 May 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11oSection 143(3)Section 57

36,48,683/- by the AO in the order u/s 143(3) dated 24.12.2018, has no merit and not in tune with the provisions of I.T. Act. As the claim of deduction of Rs. 2,89,87,471/- u/s 57 by the appellant is duly supported by the entries in ITR7 dated 16.10.2016, and other supporting evidence such as Bank

UNISYS SOFTWARES AND HOLDING IND. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 43/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Subhendu Datta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 68

36 of the Appeal Form as well as grounds of appeal, and also certified the paperbook to be present in the Court on the next date physically. Copy of this hearing is adjourned to 2nd July, 2024. Copy of this order sheet be supplied to both the parties for compliance. 4 Unisys Softwares and Holding

ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS JV, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 691/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13 Acit, Circle-33, M/S Simplex Somdatt बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, Builders, Simplex House, / 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-71 27, Shkespeare Sarani, V/S. Kokata-17 [Pan No.Aagas 1619 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 24-10-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 06-12-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata Dated 29.01.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-33 Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 23.12.2014 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1) In The Fact & Circumstance Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A)-9, Kolkata Has Erred In Allowing The Deduction Of Rs.82,56,250/- U/S 80Ia 2) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A)-9,Kolkata Has Erred In Treating The Assessee As Developer Not Contractor. 3) The Ld. Cit(A)-9, Kolkata Has Erred In Not Adhering To The Explanation To Section 80Ia (Introduced By The Finance Act, 2007). 4) The Depart Craves Leave To Add, Alter Or Amend An Ground Of Grounds Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

House, / 3rd Floor, Kolkata-71 27, Shkespeare Sarani, V/s. Kokata-17 [PAN No.AAGAS 1619 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 24-10-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 06-12-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date