Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 Versus MAHARAJA APPLIANCES LTD

2015 (9) TMI 1060 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Admission of additional evidence - Held that:- It is seen that before the CIT (A), the Assessee did produce the details on the basis of which the CIT (A) reduced the disallowance proportionate to the expenditure incurred on behalf of the sister conce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the IT Rules, the Court finds that no such point was urged by the Revenue before the ITAT. The Court does not propose to permit the Revenue to urge such question for the first time in this Court.

Nothing has been shown to the Court to per .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Appellant : Mr Rahul Chaudhary, Senior Standing counsel. For The Respondent : None JUDGEMENT 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') is directed against the impugned order dated 20th February 2015 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ore us by Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, learned Senior standing counsel for the Revenue. 3. The first pertains to a sum of ₹ 31,39,625 which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer ('AO') on the ground that it was incurred as sales and distribut .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee. The third concerns the disallowance by the AO of depreciation in the sum of ₹ 3,11,610 on ground of non-use of assets by the Assessee. 4. Mr. Chaudhary has taken the Court through the orders passed by the AO, the Commissioner of Income T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

IT (A) ought not to have been admitted since contrary to the requirement under Rule 46 A of the Income Tax Rules 1962 ('IT Rules') no opportunity of hearing was granted by the CIT (A) to the AO in regard to such additional evidence. 5. It is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version