Cit vs aggarwal engg co. 302 itr 246 p&h hc

Author: xvwt

August undefined, 2024

Web11. Expenses on VRS are allowable in year of payment (CIT vs. Bhor Industries Ltd. (264 ITR 180 (Born) (Also refer to section 35DDA inserted by Finance Act, 1999 w.e.f. 1-4-2000). 12. The word “sum” in section 40A (3) refers to single payment – CIT vs. Kothari Sanitation and Tiles P. Ltd. (282 ITR 117 (Mad). 13. WebApr 4, 2024 · The Ld. CIT (A) has taken the purchases and sales in the appellate order and the difference of the same was taken as undisclosed profit of the assessee in a sum of …

Sanjeev Walia v. Cit Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Judgment

WebMay 30, 2013 · Aggarwal Engineering Co.; 302 ITR 246(P&H), where it was observed that once the net profit rate was applied, no further addition was called for in respect of purchase and introduction of cash. (c) CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar; 270 ITR 314; (d) CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar; 229 ITR 229 (All); and Web(b) CIT vs. Aggarwal Engineering Co.; 302 ITR 246 (P&H), where it was observed that once the net profit rate was applied, no further addition was called for in respect of purchase and introduction of cash. (c) CIT vs. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar; 270 ITR 314; (d) CIT vs. Banwari Lal Banshidhar; 229 ITR 229 (All); and five little peppers movies in order

Engineering Analysis Centre Of Excellence P. Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 432 ITR ...

WebThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah J. R. D. Aggarwal & Company-called for the sake of brevity 'the assessees-are a registered firm having their place of business at … WebAkkal Dudhwewala, A.R for the Appellant. Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT for the Respondent. WebJan 11, 2024 · The A.O may proceed under Section 145(3) under any of the following circumstances: can i smart view my phone to my laptop

The Supreme Court decision on the allowability of interest on …

Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S. G.S Tiwari And Co.

WebCIT(A). The taxpayer was under bonafide belief that it was eligible to set-off the losses of the erstwhile private limited company and therefore, upon setting off of such losses its total … WebJun 23, 2013 · CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC) This decision of the SC has been followed by the Bombay, Delhi, Madras, Punjab & Haryana, Gujarat High Courts and a number of Tribunals in the country. In one case, where the view of the Assessing Officer had also been expressed by the Special Bench of the Tribunal, revision under Section 263 was held to … can i smoke after lip blushingWebGenuineness of Transactions and Cardinal concepts of taxation By CA. Pankaj G. Shah F. five little peppers in trouble 1940 cast

"WebFeb 17, 2024 · Coming back to the case, it is noted from the audited accounts of the assessee that he had shown aggregate sales to the tune of Rs.4,76,79,000/- in this … " - Cit vs aggarwal engg co. 302 itr 246 p&h hc

Cit vs aggarwal engg co. 302 itr 246 p&h hc

THE NEW REGIME OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS UNDER

WebExchange rate difference arises out of and is directly related to the sale transaction involving export of goods of the industrial undertaking and therefore, the difference on account of exchange fluctuation is entitled to deduction u/s. 80 … WebThe Pr. CIT were directed to issue instructions to AO’s to strictly adhere to the law explained in various decisions and make it mandatory for them to ensure that an order for reopening of an assessment clearly records compliance with each of the legal requirements.

Did you know?

WebJul 7, 2024 · The Central Processing Centre (CPC) has only considered the item in lieu of ‘NIL’ and has not considered the exemption under Section 10 (23C) (iiib) or deduction under Section 80P, for which it was eligible. However, AO rejected claim of assessee. On appeal. The CIT (A) and futher, the ITAT allowed assessee’s claim. WebGet free access to the complete judgment in Naresh Pharmaceutical v. Principle Commissioner Of Income Tax . on CaseMine.

WebJan 11, 2024 · He has submitted that Ld. CIT (A) has merely recorded order sheet entry on 8th June, 2024, but has not been given any specific notice for making enhancement to … Webwould be bad in law.—Manu engg. Works 122 ITR 306 (Guj), New Sorathia Engg. Co 282 ITR, 642 (Guj), Padma Ram Bharali 110 ITR 54 (Gau). Thus, basis of satisfaction can not be altered subsequently by IAC.—CIT-v-Kejriwal Iron Stores 168 ITR 715 (Raj). Even penalty can not be levied for different item—CIT-V- C.K.Nehra & Bros 117 ITR 19 Cal.

WebCreating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to: WebJaipur – 302 018. Tel: +91 141 - 7103224 Tel Kochi Syama Business Centre, 3rd Floor, NH By Pass Road, Vytilla, Kochi – 682 019. Tel: +91 484 302 5600 Kolkata Unit No. 604, 6th Floor, Tower – 1, Godrej Waterside, Sector – V, Salt Lake, Kolkata – Sai Odyssey,700 091. Tel: +91 33 4403 4000 Mumbai 1st Floor, Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills,

Webthe case of CIT vs. Aggarwal Engg. Co. (Jal) reported in 302 ITR 246 (P&H), is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case and each case has to be seen in its own facts and circumstances. 7. The Ld. counsel for the assessee, Sh. supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and argued that the accounts of the

WebCIT (2006) 287 ITR 209) Assessing Authority has no power to entertain a claim made by assessee otherwise than by filing a revised return (Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 284 … five little peppers and how they grew bookWebJun 30, 2016 · (i) Source of deposit, or of cash inflow, is explained through gross profit additions. [refer- CIT v.Aggarwal Engg. Co. (Jal.) [2008] 302 ITR 246/156 Taxman 40 (Punj.& Har.)] (ii)Investment in later years is explained by intangible additions of earlier years, unless it is proved by the Revenue that such additions were not available for … five little peppers and how they grew movieWebMar 3, 2024 · CIT vs Aggarwal Engg Co. (302 ITR 246) (P&H HC) New Pooja Jewellers Vs. ITO CIT vs Bahubali N Muttin (72 taxmann.com 139) In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the … five little peppers in trouble 1940WebMar 23, 2024 · The assessee did not challenge the rejection of the books of account under section 145(3) and the addition made by Ld. CIT(A) above to the profit of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) forgot to consider that if he wanted to make addition on account of peak credit on account of M/s. Hanuman Traders, whether theory of peak credit would apply in the ... five little pigs agatha christie summary can i smoke after having a tooth pulledWebDec 24, 2009 · Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. vs. CIT and Anr (2009) 308 ITR 38 (Del.) X. Reassessment within four years. 25. An assessment order passed after detailed discussion cannot be reopened within a period of 4 years unless the AO has reason to believe due to some inherent defect in the assessment. five little pigs agatha christie readWeb(b) CIT vs. Aggarwal Engineering Co.; 302 ITR 246 (P&H), where it was observed that once the net profit rate was applied, no further addition was called for in respect of purchase and introduction of cash. (c) CIT vs. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar; 270 ITR 314; (d) CIT vs. Banwari Lal Banshidhar; 229 ITR 229 (All); and five little pigs author