ACIT, HISAR vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

ITA 220/DEL/2009Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 December 2021AY 2003-04104 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the subsidy claim on merits, referencing the Supreme Court's clarification on the Tribunal's power to admit new claims. It also followed its earlier decisions on other grounds related to aircraft expenditure and commission payments.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption for sales tax, entry tax, and electricity duty as capital receipts, but the CIT(A) did not adjudicate on merits, citing a Supreme Court decision. The assessee also claimed deductions for aircraft expenditure and commission payments, which were partly disallowed or directed to be verified.

What were the issues?

Whether subsidies claimed as capital receipts should be adjudicated on merits by the Tribunal, and the allowability of expenses related to aircraft and commission payments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 254,Section 37,Section 32(1)(i),Section 115JB,Section 80HHC,Section 80IA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(30)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ]

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate, Shri Sumit Lalchandani, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv, Shri S. Najmi, [CIT] – D.R
Hearing: 02/09/2021Pronounced: 01/12/2021

Heard together (4 matters)

ITA. No. 167/Del/2009
ITA. No. 413/Del/2010
ITA. No. 220/Del/2009
ITA. No. 341/Del/2010

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER AMIT SHUKLA, J. M.: These eight cross appeals, four by the assessee and four by the Revenue are filed for assessment years 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. These were heard tog

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →