Tally for CAs in Industry Silver Edition (Single User) Tally Renewal (Auditor Edition) Need Tally for Clients? (Tie-up with us!!!)
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 CVO Chartered & Cost Accountants Association vs. UOI (Bombay High Court)
 CIT vs. Shriram Ownership Trust (Madras High Court)
 ABHISHEK VERMA, C/O MR. JITENDRA GARG, ADVOCATE, CHAMBER NO. 137, PATIALA HOUSE COURT, NEW DELHI Vs. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-12, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI
 Ratnagiri Gas and Power Pvt. Ltd. NTPC Bhawan, Core-7, Scope Complex, 7, Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Vs. DCIT Circle-21(1) New Delhi
 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Saharanpur. Vs. Shri Ishtiyaque Ahmed through Legal Heirs Smt. Mushyada Begum, S/Shri Mohd. Azhar, Athar and Moyeen, 1/142, Mohalla Qureshian, Saharanpur
 ACIT, Central Circle 07, New Delhi. vs. M/s. R. J. Corp Ltd., F 2/7, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase I, New Delhi.
 Experion Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. F-9, First Floor, Manish Plaza 1, Plot No. 7, M. L. U, Sector-10, Dwarka Delhi Vs. ACIT Circle-8(2) New Delhi
 USK Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. E-172, DDA, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi Vs. ITO Ward-27(1) New Delhi
  Sh. Chakra Dhari Sureka, M-14B, South Extn. Part-II, New Delhi Vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, New Delhi
 ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA, 299, DEEPALI ENCLAVE, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI Vs. ITO, WARD 40(3), NEW DELHI
 B.M. Malhotra & Sons Ltd., C/o Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector 7, Rohini, Delhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), New Delhi.

Japan International Co-operation Agency (JICA) New Delhi vs ACIT (Intl. Taxation), Circle 2(1)(2) Room NO. 310 3rd Floor, Block 2, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Civic Centre, New Delhi,
November, 18th 2020

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 6/4/2017 passed by CIT(A)- 43, for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellant respectfully submits:

1. “That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld C1T(A) has erred in upholding the assessment order passed by Ld AO under section 143(3) for the subject year wherein the income was assessed at Rs. 71,21,390 as against NIL returned income declared by the appellant and is liable to be quashed.

For more information

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2021 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting