The Commissioner of Income TAx-IV, vs. M/s. Mahaveer Enterprises (India) Limited

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

condonation of delay and that exercise of discretion in favour of the Appellants is untenable. The Tribunal also discussed merits of the case and dismissed the appeal on merits following Full Bench decision of Gujarat High Court. 24. The observations made by the learned Single Judge in the said judgement (Coram: A.P. Ravani, J.) about Section 10(3) declaration vesting

The Commissioner of Income Tax- IV vs. M/s. Prabhat Agri Bio Tech P Ltd.

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

justice, when there was negligence or resort to dilatory tactics or there was want of bona fides, condonation could not be granted. 29. The bona fides that Ashok Leyland claims is the mere fact of filing the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC immediately on getting the notice in RFA 459/2015. However, bona fides is also to be seen

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Condonation of Delay) PCIT (CENTRAL) - 3 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajit Sharma, Senior Standing Counsel versus SATISH DEV JAIN ..... Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ITA 23/2021 and connected matters Page 3 of 11 JUDGMENT [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING] SANJEEV NARULA, J (ORAL): 1. The present appeals under Section 260A

EVEREST ORGANICS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T., HYDERABAD

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order of reassessment on the dictates of the higher authorities sitting at Delhi and Jabalpur. 71. Once having held that the reassessment started at the dictation of the higher authorities and thereafter, during reassessment process too continuous instructions were

C. SANYASI RAJU vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIZAG.

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order of reassessment on the dictates of the higher authorities sitting at Delhi and Jabalpur. 71. Once having held that the reassessment started at the dictation of the higher authorities and thereafter, during reassessment process too continuous instructions were

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order of reassessment on the dictates of the higher authorities sitting at Delhi and Jabalpur. 71. Once having held that the reassessment started at the dictation of the higher authorities and thereafter, during reassessment process too continuous instructions were

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited,(Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,

natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order of reassessment on the dictates of the higher authorities sitting at Delhi and Jabalpur. 71. Once having held that the reassessment started at the dictation of the higher authorities and thereafter, during reassessment process too continuous instructions were

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Smt. Raj Kumari

Accordingly are partly allowed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

natural justice; that its findings are based on no evidence, or are otherwise perverse, or that there was an error of law apparent on the face of the record. The vital rights of the parties would now be determined by the Divisional Commissioner, who will not be amenable to the High Court’s superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

The appeal stands dismissed on the ground of low tax

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd February, 2022 Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv.

JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 3rd February, 2022 Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. Vivek Murarka, Adv. … For Respondent The Court : There is a delay of 2162 days in filing the appeal. By order dated 14th September, 2011 the Division Bench condoned the delay subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/-. When the matter is taken up today

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Best India Tobacco Suppliers Private Limited,

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 18TH MAGHA, 1945 WA NO. 2267 OF 2018 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT OP 3315/1999 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT: REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SUJIN, SC, EPFO SC, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGAINSATION - EPFO NITA N.S RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 1ST RESPONDENT

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. M/s Sri Sri Gruha Nirman India Pvt. Ltd.

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] GIRISH KATHPALIA, J.: CM APPL. 12487/2023 in ITA 157/2023 [Condonation of delay in re- filing the appeal] By way of this application, the appellant/revenue has sought Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:10.01.2024 15:43:36 Signature Not Verified ITA 1021/2019 & 157/2023 Page 2 of 9 pages condonation of delay

The Commissioner of Income Tax [Central] vs. Smt P Sujana

The appeal stands disposed of as indicated above

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI I.T.A.No.280/2015 BETWEEN : M/s THE KOLAR & CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., POST BOXS NO.11, D.C.C. BANK, KOLAR-563101 REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI UMAKANTH S/O SRI SHESH RAO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS ...APPELLANT (BY SMT.JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADV. FOR SRI S.PARTHASARATHI, ADV.) AND : THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), UNITY BUILDING

M/S MAQSOD AND CO HYDERABAD vs. THE COMMNER OF INCOME TAX HYD

nature and family responsibilities occupy the mind of kith and kin to such an extent that they give more importance to get the victim treated rather than to rush to the police station. Under such circumstances, they are not expected to act mechanically with promptitude in lodging the FIR with the police. Delay in lodging the FIR thus, cannot

The Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. M/s. Rockwell Collins (India) Enterprises PVt. Ltd.,

The appeal is disposed of

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

condoned the delay and directed CIT(A) to re-hear the matter on merits. The CIT(A)-II under order dated 27.02.2009 rejected the appeal for non-payment of admitted tax as required under Section 249(4) of the Act. The Assessee thereafter preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, while rejecting the contention of the Assessee as regards

Commissioner of Income Tax- IT and TP vs. M/s. Louis Berger International Inc.,

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

delay in the clearance of the imported consignments, the appellants and its sister concern had been compelled to pay excess duty of over Rs 25 crores from August 2013 onwards. It is unfortunate and has to be accepted that the respondent authorities had compelled and forced the appellant to furnish the letter dated 6- 3-2017 thereby waiving

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

delay in the clearance of the imported consignments, the appellants and its sister concern had been compelled to pay excess duty of over Rs 25 crores from August 2013 onwards. It is unfortunate and has to be accepted that the respondent authorities had compelled and forced the appellant to furnish the letter dated 6- 3-2017 thereby waiving

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, vs. M/s. V.Dhana Reddy AND Co.,

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

condonation of delay under a wrong provision of law will not vitiate the application. 18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Pankajbhai Rameshbhai Zalavadiya Vs. Jethabhai Kalabhai Zalavadiya; (2017) 9 SCC 700, has held that it is by now well settled that a mere wrong mention of the provision in the application would not prohibit a party

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, vs. M/s Trinity Advanced Software Labs Private Limited,

In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR I.T.A. NO.421 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. 2. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-1(2) RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560001. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. ABBEY BUSINESS SERVICES (INDIA) PVT., LTD., THE RESIDENCY, 7TH FLOOR