Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax-VI Versus M/s. Unitech Ltd.

2015 (10) TMI 950 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Benefit of deduction under Section 80IB (10) - CIT initiated proceedings under Section 263 and proceeded to withdraw the deduction claimed by the Assessee under Section 80IB(10) was whether the requirement under Section 80AC, that the return had to be filed within the time prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act, was mandatory - ITAT concluded that there was no justification for CIT to have invoked the jurisdiction Section 263 - Held that:- As far as the present case is concerned, the Court i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment under Section 80AC of the Act is mandatory is left open for consideration in an appropriate case. - Decided against revenue. - ITA 239/2015 & CM No. 6678/2015 - Dated:- 5-10-2015 - S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Rohit Madan, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr Salil Aggarwal and Mr Ravi Pratap Mall, Advocates ORDER CM No. 6678/2015 (Delay in refiling) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 296 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. 2. The appl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ncome Tax on 30th December, 2009. In terms of Section 80AC of the Act the return had to be filed by the Assessee, on or before the due date specified under Section 139(1) , which in this case meant on or before 31st October, 2008. 5. A short question before the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) who initiated proceedings under Section 263 and proceeded to withdraw the deduction claimed by the Assessee under Section 80IB(10) was whether the requirement under Section 80AC, that the return had to be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

his Court Mr Rohit Madan, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue has placed reliance on the decision dated 27th August 2012 of the Uttarakhand High Court in ITA No. 07/2012 (Umesh Chandra Dalakoti v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax) as well as of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Shelcon Properties (P) Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 305 (Cal) both of which have held the provision under Section 80AC of the Act to be mandatory. He has also referred to the decisions of the ITAT Special Bench in Saffire .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

78 Taxman 432 (Del) and CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P) Ltd. (2009) 178 Taxman422 (Del). He also placed reliance on the decision dated 26th June 2013 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in ITTA No. 114 of 2013 (CIT v. Sri S Venkataiah), the decisions dated 29th April 2013 of the ITAT Madras in ITA No. 1214/Mds/2012 (ACIT v. Precot Meridian Ltd.) and 4th February 2013 in ITA No. 1219-1223/Mds/2012 (ACIT v. V.N. Devadoss), the decisions of the ITAT Delhi dated 30th July 2010 in ACIT v. Dhir Global .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version