9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ute that on facts as well as on law the issue raised in the present petition is covered by the judgment of this Court in Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. [ 2023 (9) TMI 552 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein the Court has held that for the Assessment Year 2016-17, the sanction should have been given u/s 151 (ii) and not u/s 151(i) and consequentially the sanction is invalid, on account of which, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at there is a proposal to challenge the judgment in Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) before the Hon ble Apex Court, that as yet has not been done, considering which there is no reason to entertain his request for an adjournment on that ground. Petition is accordingly allowed. - AVINASH G. GHAROTE SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Kapil Hirani, counsel . For the Respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment Year 2016-17 and refers to prior approval of the Principal CIT-1, Nagpur which is relatable to Section 151(i) and not to Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which position is not disputed by Mr. Mohta, learned counsel for the respondents, and since the date of the notice is 01/07/2022, what would be applicable would be Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In that factuality ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
