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

price. 27. In that view of the matter, as it is admitted case of the petitioner that the electricity generated in 540 MW Power Plant is used in the course of or furtherance of his business, which is evident from Form G provided by the taxpayer i.e. the petitioner herein, the petitioner would not be entitled for ITC to electrical

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

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA

22. It is submitted that the impugned order cannot alter the order dated 27th August, 2010 by which the Joint APLs were appointed and therefore, the directions were issued in Sub-Para (a), (b) and (c) in the impugned order enforcing the APLs' decision by majority and recognizing the power of the Joint

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

Bench: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,SAMEER JAIN

22. It is submitted that the impugned order cannot alter the order dated 27th August, 2010 by which the Joint APLs were appointed and therefore, the directions were issued in Sub-Para (a), (b) and (c) in the impugned order enforcing the APLs' decision by majority and recognizing the power of the Joint

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT LTD

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,KULDEEP MATHUR

E N T Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. As all these appeals filed by the Revenue arise out of a common order dated 30.09.2019 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'], Cochin Bench, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, the details

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I vs. M/S P.R. ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD.

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,BHUWAN GOYAL

22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 354/2018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 2 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S CHRYS CAPITAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Vikas Srivastava, Advocate with Mr. Mayank Aggarwal and Ms. Kanika Jain, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

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

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR

E-2, Upper Ground Floor, Jawahar Park, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092 and with respect to which, the parties had entered into two agreements on RFA No. 322/2017 Page 2 of 34 20.02.2008, one being an Agreement to Sell and another being an Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter „MOU‟). 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff pleaded that

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

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,SUDESH BANSAL

2. This Regulation protects fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons and in particular their right to the protection of personal data. 3. The free movement of personal data within the Union shall be neither restricted nor prohibited for reasons connected with the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data. Article 4: Definitions: Digitally Signed