The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. M/s Hyderabad Security and Off Set Printers Ltd.,

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

1), BENGALURU & ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, Dr. VINEET KOTHARI, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T Mr. K.V.Aravind, Adv. for Appellants – Revenue Mr. A.Shankar & Mr. M.Lava, Advs. for Respondent – Assessee. This Appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income

The Commissioner of Income Tax -III vs. Sri T.C. Reddy

The appeal stands dismissed

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) r.w 274 of the Income-tax Act for concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars are initiated separately. (iv) The assessee has booked various expenses of contractual nature, vide order sheet entry dated 29.12.2009, the assessee was asked to show cause why the same should not disallowed u/s40a(ia). In response thereto the assessee

PR COMMR OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. K RAVINDER REDDY, HYDERABAD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

section. Nonetheless, as an overall matter, GE is correct that in some instances, ITAT‟s characterization of certain conversations appears to overstate the importance of the activities in India (for e.g. e- mail chain on Reliance-GT Exhaust Height; e-mail chain on confirmation of RIL PO No. DG8/3389741). Nevertheless, in many other instances, ITAT‟s decision is sound

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. Shri Raaj Kumar Jain

Section 27 begins with a proviso and states that when any fact is deposed to as discovered, in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved, 49 whether it amounts to a confession