2019 (7) TMI 1574

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rs of the Assessee the business of which was closed - HELD THAT:- Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory [ 2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] which in turn followed the judgment of this Court in Madhushree Gupta v. Union of India [ 2009 (7) TMI 38 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] where this Court considered the challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 271(1B) of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1998-1999 which is more than two decades ago, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the ITAT. - JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR And JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH For the Appellant : Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Madhur Jain, Advocate ORDER 1. Learned counsel for the Respondent Assessee informs the Court that after th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2) of the Act and reversed its earlier decision only on the basis that it had not taken into account the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 which in turn followed the judgment of this Court in Madhushree Gupta v. Union of India (2009) 317 ITR 107 where this Court considered the challenge to the constitutional validity of Section .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X