Commissioner of Income tax-V, vs. M/s. INTRACK INC,

1) of section 9; By Finance Act, 2010, the said provision is substituted by the following: Substituted by the Finance Act, 2010, w.e.f. 01.04.2010. Prior to its substitution, proviso as substituted by the Finance Act, 2008, w.r.e.f. 01.04.2005, read as under: 12 “Provided that where in respect of any such sum, tax has been deducted in any subsequent year

COMM OF INCOME TAX, HYD vs. M/S. BALAN NATURAL FOOD PRIVATE LTD., HYD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

disallowed the aforesaid amount in terms of Section 14A of the Act. A sum of Rs.3,43,28,658/- being 5% thereof was estimated as expenditure incurred for earning such income. 3. The assessee, thereupon, filed an appeal. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by an order dated 31.05.2011 partly allowed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the revenue as well

THE PRL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. L SURYAKANTHAM, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

disallowance of Rs.74,08,964/- under the provisions of Section 80JJAA of the Act were proposed. The 5 assessee thereupon filed objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel contesting all the additions. The Dispute Resolution Panel, however rejected the objections preferred by the assessee. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred

COMMISSISONER OF I.T. RAJAHMUNDRY vs. M/S.Y RAMAKRISHNA AND OTHERS

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ms. B.krishna Murthy AND Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. m/S.M.Ventakteswara Rao AND Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajahmundry. vs. m/s Ganesh Arrack Contractors,

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.G.V.Krishna Reddy AND Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

COMMR.OF I.T. RKAJAHMUNDRY vs. T.RAMI REDDY AND ORS

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

The Commissioner of income tax, vs. M/s.Y.Ramulu and Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s GRK Prasad AND others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.B.Satyanarayana AND Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s Y.Ramakrishna and Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S G.R.K.PRASAD AND OTHERS

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

COMMISSIONER OFINCOEMETAX vs. M/S. V.SATYANARAYANA AND OTHERS

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

The commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.M.Narayana Choudary and Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

The Commissioner of Income tax vs. M/s.V.Satyanrayana AND Others

In the result, for the above reasons, we set aside the orders

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

9], the assessee was engaged in bullion business. It was assessed to sales tax for seven quarters under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. For three quarters the assessee did not file returns. The Sales Tax Officer (STO), in exercise of the power under Section 10(4) of the said Act, assessed the tax applying the principle of best judgment

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Dr. T.Ravi Kumar,

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 10Th April, 2024. Appearance: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Mr. Sanjay Bhowmick, Advocate Ms. Swapna Das, Advocate … For The Appellant. Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Sanjay Bhowmick, Learned Counsel For The Appellant/Assessee & Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Respondent. 2. The Assessment Years Involved In The Present Appeal Are Assessment Year 1999-2000 & Assessment Year 2000-01. By Order Dated 16.08.2012, This Appeal Was Admitted On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law :-

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the interest paid to financial institutions/banks during the previous years in question, is allowable expenditure under Section 43B of the Act, 1961 which was claimed by the assessee. Pursuant to the returns filed by the assessee, no assessment order was passed by the assessing officer. Therefore, the order passed by the assessing