Judgements by CS Bijoy

We have heard the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record and the judgments cited by both sides. We find that the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of East India Housing and Land Development Trus

The Assessee is a finance and investment company. For the Assessment year under consideration for which the relevant previous year was the period between 1-4-1992 to 31-3-1993, the assessee company filed its return of income on 31.12.1993 declaring t

These two stay applications are connected and issues are similar. These stay applications are preferred by assessees on the issue whether the long term capital gains and short term capital gains offered should be treated as business income or profess

JCIT (OSD)-1(1), Room No.533 & 579, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) Vs. M/s. Good Value Marketing Co.Ltd. 3rd floor Indl. Assurance Bldg., Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020 PAN NO: AAACG 4925 D (Respondent)

The captioned appeal is fixed for hearing before the Hon’ble ‘G’ Bench today. The appellant has received partial relief. As the tax effect of the remaining issue is not significant, the appellant does not wish to pursue the appeal. In the circumstanc

The only ground of appeal shows the grievance of the appellant against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-39, Mumbai. who held that the interest to the tune of Rs..41,05,081/- should be considered for working out the disallowance u/s.14A of the Act. Briefly

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of N deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80HH of the Income Tax Act, 1961

We have heard both the sides and perused the material placed before us. The facts of the case are that the impugned appeal has originated from the assessment order dated 28.12.2010 which was passed by the Assessing Officer in pursuance to the order u

This petition filed in public interest has been listed and is taken up for hearing on urgent mentioning. The petitioner, an Advocate, invites attention of this Court to the difficulties likely to be faced by the Differently Abled candidates in the ex

Referring to the grounds of appeal, it was submitted by the learned AR that the assessee had reasonable and sufficient cause for non-appearance before CIT (A) as Shri Ajay Gupta was suffering from high blood pressure. He submitted that otherwise also