1. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Modi Xerox Ltd.

365 ITR 200High Court2014#17833 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing 1. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Modi Xerox Ltd.

COLGATE PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 10(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1431/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1431 /Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income- Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3) Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400076

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

…the profit and gains derived by the industrial undertaking from its eligible business. In order to buttress his aforesaid claim the ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT & Anr. Vs. Modi Xerox Ltd. (2014) 365 ITR 200 (All). 18. Per contra, the ld. D.R relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 19. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid issue and find substantial force in the contention advanced by Mr. Pardiwala, the ld. Senior counsel. On a perusal of Sec. 80IC of the Act, we find that the same therein contemplates deduction of any pr…

DCIT 10(3), MUMBAI vs. COLGATE PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1350/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1431 /Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income- Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3) Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400076

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

…the profit and gains derived by the industrial undertaking from its eligible business. In order to buttress his aforesaid claim the ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT & Anr. Vs. Modi Xerox Ltd. (2014) 365 ITR 200 (All). 18. Per contra, the ld. D.R relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 19. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid issue and find substantial force in the contention advanced by Mr. Pardiwala, the ld. Senior counsel. On a perusal of Sec. 80IC of the Act, we find that the same therein contemplates deduction of any pr…

THE SUPREME INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3140/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 1Section 11Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,E,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Supreme Industries Ltd. ACIT 612 Raheja Chambers, 213, बनाम/ Central Circle 29, Nariman Point, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.AAACT1344F Assessment Year: 2006-07 ACIT The Supreme Industries Ltd. Central Circle 29, 612 Raheja Chambers, 213, बनाम/ Mumbai Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400021 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.AAACT1344F Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Supre…

THE SUPREME INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3139/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 1Section 11Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,E,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Supreme Industries Ltd. ACIT 612 Raheja Chambers, 213, बनाम/ Central Circle 29, Nariman Point, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.AAACT1344F Assessment Year: 2006-07 ACIT The Supreme Industries Ltd. Central Circle 29, 612 Raheja Chambers, 213, बनाम/ Mumbai Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400021 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.AAACT1344F Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Supre…

THE SUPREME INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3138/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 1Section 11Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,E,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Supreme Industries Ltd. ACIT 612 Raheja Chambers, 213, बनाम/ Central Circle 29, Nariman Point, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.AAACT1344F Assessment Year: 2006-07 ACIT The Supreme Industries Ltd. Central Circle 29, 612 Raheja Chambers, 213, बनाम/ Mumbai Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400021 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.AAACT1344F Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Supre…

1. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Modi Xerox Ltd. (365 ITR 200) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax