PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SKYWAYS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPANY (P) LTD.

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,SUDESH BANSAL

additional information, provided that such additional information is kept separately and is subject to technical and organisational measures to ensure that the personal data are not attributed to an identified or identifiable natural person. Article 25: Data protection by design and by default: 1. Taking into account the state of the art, the cost of implementation and the nature, scope

M/S SARAF SEASONING UDYOG vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR

transferred to his account in the bank. He had two saving accounts in ICICI Bank and Oriental Bank of Commerce and one joint account with his mother in ICICI Bank. He also had one current account in HDFC Bank. He denied the suggestion that there was no money lying in the saving account since February, 2008, till date. He stated

ANKIT CHIRAG DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. vs. ASSITANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

price during the pendency of ligation. It was accordingly held that what has to be seen is that who is the defaulting party and whether the party is taking undue advantage over the other and the hardship that may be caused to either of the parties. 14. It was held that the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. NAMITA CHHABRA

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN

Income Tax (Appeals) Chandigarh and another4 to buttress his submissions. He would further submit that insertion of Explanation 1(d) to Rule 43 of the CGST Rules by Notification No.14/2022 – Central Tax dated 5th July, 2022 is applicable to the pending proceeding, as the same is clarificatory in nature and the same has been made pursuant to the recommendation made

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. NAMITA CHHABRA

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN

Income Tax (Appeals) Chandigarh and another4 to buttress his submissions. He would further submit that insertion of Explanation 1(d) to Rule 43 of the CGST Rules by Notification No.14/2022 – Central Tax dated 5th July, 2022 is applicable to the pending proceeding, as the same is clarificatory in nature and the same has been made pursuant to the recommendation made

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SAMARPAN SYNTHETICS PVT LTD

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,REKHA BORANA

Income Tax (Appeals) Chandigarh and another4 to buttress his submissions. He would further submit that insertion of Explanation 1(d) to Rule 43 of the CGST Rules by Notification No.14/2022 – Central Tax dated 5th July, 2022 is applicable to the pending proceeding, as the same is clarificatory in nature and the same has been made pursuant to the recommendation made

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, vs. MS. HARSHITA MAHESHWARI,

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA

prices of shares of those companies which are authorized in the (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 86 of 300 stock exchange have gone up substantially in BCrL, UCL, VTL and BCL and dividends have been consistently declared by those companies. Further, there are no ground for opposing the re-appointment

M/S FINGROWTH COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,SAMEER JAIN

prices of shares of those companies which are authorized in the (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 86 of 300 stock exchange have gone up substantially in BCrL, UCL, VTL and BCL and dividends have been consistently declared by those companies. Further, there are no ground for opposing the re-appointment