1-9 2 Commissioner of Income-tax, Thichur v. ST. Francis Clay Décor Tiles

22 Taxmann.com 234High Court#13764 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 153(a)(1)abatement of assessmentsection 158basection 113bogus share capitalset off of lossessection 153(a)section 153a(1)(a)section 158bbsection 153a(1)(b)block periodsection 127

Judgments citing 1-9 2 Commissioner of Income-tax, Thichur v. ST. Francis Clay Décor Tiles

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 173/JPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 171 to 173/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 cuke The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Royal Jewellers, Vs. tax, 1756, Telipara, Chaura Central Circle-02, Jaipur Rasta, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFR 6642 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh…

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 172/JPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 171 to 173/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 cuke The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Royal Jewellers, Vs. tax, 1756, Telipara, Chaura Central Circle-02, Jaipur Rasta, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFR 6642 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh…

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 171/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 171 to 173/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 cuke The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Royal Jewellers, Vs. tax, 1756, Telipara, Chaura Central Circle-02, Jaipur Rasta, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFR 6642 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh…

Indagro Foods P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2998/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 80I

…sidered the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sterling Foods (1986 AIR 1809) and decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gitwako Farma (I)(P) Ltd. (10 taxmann.com 261, ITAT Hyderabad decision in the case of Ventak…….. Vs. ACIT (22 Taxmann.com 234). 5. In the rejoinder, learned Counsel of the assessee stated that the ITAT has decided the issue after considering a large number of decisions including number of decisions from Hon'ble Apex Court. He further submitted that decisions referred by learned Departmental Representative are not applicable on the facts of the case. 6. Upon car…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Sona Vets Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1647/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Ravivs M/S. Sona Vets Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Central Circle-2(1), 17Th Floor, Room No.17B & C, Kolkata-700107. Everest House, 46C, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata-700071. Pan-Aaecs0908G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Dr. P.K.Srihari, Cit Dr Respondent By Shikha Agarwal, Aoa Date Of Hearing 24.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 23.04.2019 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravithis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 04.05.2017 Passed By Cit(A)-20, Kolkata For Ay 2014-15. 2. Ground Nos. 1 To 4 Are Relating To Deletion Of Addition Made On Account Of Deduction U/S 80Ia Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”).

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…nts to 'manufacture'. It is clear that the process of producing poultry feeds involves the process of manufacturing. The Id. DR, even though relied on the decision of the Hyderabad Bench “A" of the Tribunal in the case of Venkateswara Feeds & Feeds -vs- ACIT 22 Taxmann.com 234 (Hyd.) but we noted that the undertaking for which the assessee has claimed the deduction under section 80-1B was merely engaged in converting the poultry mash feed into pellet feed and therefore that Bench has held that there was no change in the basic component or new or different article came into existence. As such, conversion was proc…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Amricon Agrovat Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2300/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon'Ble Sri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Central Circle-2(1) -Vs- M/S. Amricon Agrovat (P).Ltd., Kolkata Kolkata (Pan Aadca 1610 Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant: Shri.S.Dasgupta Addl.Cit Dr For The Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, Fca Date Of Hearing : 15.2.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.03.2018. Order Per Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 27.9.2016 Of Cit(A)-20, Kolkata, Relating To Ay 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue In This Reads As Follows: “(I) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Accepting That The Term 'Manufacture' Occurring In The Context Of Section 80-Ib Does Not Necessarily Require That The End Product Of The Manufacturing Process Is To Be Completely Different From The Ingredients, As Regards Its Chemical Composition, Integral Structure Or Its Use. (Ii) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Accepting That The Process Of Manufacturing Of Poultry Feeds Does Not Amount To Mere Mixing Together Of All Different Ingredients, Without Involving Any Change In The Chemical Composition Of The Ingredients. (Iii) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Accepting That The Process Of Preparation Of Poultry Feeds Amount To Production Of An Article Within The Meaning Of Section 80Ib. (Iv) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Entire Amount Of Rs.1,12,50,626/- Claimed As Deduction U/S 80-Ib.

For Appellant: Shri.S.Dasgupta Addl.CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA
Section 14ASection 80Section 801B(4)Section 80I

…n article. ITA No.2300/Kol/2016 M/s. Amricon Agrovat Pvt.Ltd. A.Y.2013-14 6 11. The learned DR however submitted that in the decisions rendered by the Tribunal, the decision rendered by the Hyderabad Bench of ITAT in the case of Venkateswara Feeds -vs- ACIT 22 Taxmann.com 234 (Hyd.) was not properly considered and therefore the decision rendered in Assessee’s own case requires reconsideration. In this regard it was submitted that the Tribunal in the case of Venkateswar Feeds (supra) found that various feed ingredients such as maize, rice bran, de-oiled soya etc., along with certain feed premixes are mixed in di…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Amrit Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2304/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 2304 & 2305/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Cc-2(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Amrit Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacca 5987 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Hangshing, CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 80I

…that the assessee is engaged in the manufacture or production of an article. 2.8. The learned DR however submitted that in the decisions rendered by the Tribunal, the decision rendered by the Hyderabad Bench of ITAT in the case of Venkataswara Feeds vs. ACIT 22 Taxmann.com 234(Hyd.) was not properly considered and therefore the decision rendered in Assessee’s own case requires reconsideration. In this regard it was submitted that the Tribunal in the case of Venkateswar Feeds (supra) found that various feed ingredients such as maize, rice bran, de-oiled soya etc. along with certain feed premixes are mixed in diff…

1-9 2 Commissioner of Income-tax, Thichur v. ST. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (22 Taxmann.com 234) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax