REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Ritz Theatre Appellant

V/S

INCOME TAX OFFICER Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

ASHUTOSH SIKDAR V. BIHARI LAL KIRTANIA [REFERRED TO]
DEEP CHAND KOTHARI V. CIT [REFERRED TO]
CIT V. SUN ENGG. WORKS (P.) LTD. [REFERRED TO]
JINDAL PHOTO FILMS LTD. V. DY. CIT [REFERRED TO]
CIT V. SHITAL PRASAD KHARAG PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
CIT V. ASHOK KUMAR BHARTI AND VIJAY KUMAR GOEL [REFERRED TO]
CIT V. HOTLINE INTERNATIONAL (P.) LTD. [REFERRED TO]
KIRAN SINGH VS. CHAMAN PASWAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. MOHAMMAD NOOH [REFERRED TO]
Y NARAYANA CHETTY VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER NEILORE [REFERRED TO]
BHOPAL SUGAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER BHOPAL [REFERRED TO]
MATHURA PRASAD BAJOO JAISWAL VS. DOSSIBAI N B JEEJEEBHOYF [REFERRED TO]
BARADA KANTA MISHRA VS. HIGH COURT OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF JUSTICE OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. L V A DIXITULU:V V S KRISHNAMURTHY [REFERRED TO]
BISHNU RAM BORAH VS. PARAG SAIKIA [REFERRED TO]
KALI PRASAD VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION [REFERRED TO]
MAHILA BAJRANGI VS. BADRIBAI [REFERRED TO]
DWARKA PRASAD AGARWAL VS. B D AGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
K P DWIVEDI VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BISHWANATH PRASAD SINGH VS. RAJENDRA PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
PAPER PRODUCTS LTD VS. COMMNR OF CENTRAL EXCISE MUMBAI [REFERRED TO]
BHUPINDER SINGH BHATIA VS. COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. NANALAL TRIBHOVANDAS [REFERRED TO]
P V DOSHI VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
RAWATMAL HARAKCHAND VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
PONKUNNAM TRADERS VS. ADDITIONAL INCOME TAX OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. RANE BRAKE LININGS LTD [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. AVTAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE controversy involved in this batch of appeals being similar, it was heard analogously and is disposed of by a common order. Be it noted, the appeals that are directed against the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench F, New Delhi on 19 -6 -2009 (for short 'the Tribunal') which disposed of ITA Nos. 1779 to 1783/ Delhi/2009 pertaining to the assessment years 1990 -91 to 1992 -93 and 1995 -96 and 1996 -97, have been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

(2.) THE brief facts which are imperative to be exposited for adjudication of these appeals are that the Assessee had filed returns of income for the assessment years in question on 2 -12 -1999 and the said returns were processed under Section 143(1) on 5 -3 -2002. The Assessing Officer noted that the Assessee -company had made disclosure of income under the VDIS, 1997. The Assessee failed to deposit the taxes in accordance with the VDIS and, therefore, the declaration was held to be void in terms of Section 67(2) of the Scheme. Notices under Section 148 of the Act were issued on 24 -12 -1999. The Assessing Officer had issued notices under Section 143(2)/142(1) along with the questionnaire. In response to the said notices, the Managing Director of the company appeared before the Assessing Officer from time to time and filed details as called for. The Assessing Officer found that the Assessee had not made any payment of tax under self -assessment or under the provisions of VDIS, 1997. In this backdrop, he completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act.

(3.) THE CIT(A), while dealing with the said aspect, came to hold as follows:

Click here to view full judgment.

RITZ THEATRE Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address