1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. v. CIT

26 ITR 15High Court1946#12513 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 181section 43(1)additional depreciationsection 18section 45erroneous and prejudicialcapital expendituresection 43section 263section 26section 143(2)company

Judgments citing 1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. v. CIT

The Dy CIT 1(1), Indore vs. M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 86/IND/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

…be utilized other than the purpose providing in the regulations. He has supported the impugned order of the CIT(A) and also relied upon following decisions: 1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. vs. CIT 41 ITR 608 (SC) 2. Monghyr Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 15 (Patna) 3. DCIT vs. Sabarmati Gas Co. Ltd. (ITANo.2956/Ahd/2010) date of order 02.03.2016 4. DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. (ITANo.3800/Del/2015 date of order 08.02.2019 5. We have considered rival submission as well as relevant material on record. In the revision order passed u/s 263 the Pr. CIT has simply set aside the original order of the AO…

The Dy CIT 1(1), Indore vs. M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 63/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

…be utilized other than the purpose providing in the regulations. He has supported the impugned order of the CIT(A) and also relied upon following decisions: 1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. vs. CIT 41 ITR 608 (SC) 2. Monghyr Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 15 (Patna) 3. DCIT vs. Sabarmati Gas Co. Ltd. (ITANo.2956/Ahd/2010) date of order 02.03.2016 4. DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. (ITANo.3800/Del/2015 date of order 08.02.2019 5. We have considered rival submission as well as relevant material on record. In the revision order passed u/s 263 the Pr. CIT has simply set aside the original order of the AO…

The Dy CIT 1(1), Indore vs. M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 62/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

…be utilized other than the purpose providing in the regulations. He has supported the impugned order of the CIT(A) and also relied upon following decisions: 1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. vs. CIT 41 ITR 608 (SC) 2. Monghyr Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 15 (Patna) 3. DCIT vs. Sabarmati Gas Co. Ltd. (ITANo.2956/Ahd/2010) date of order 02.03.2016 4. DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. (ITANo.3800/Del/2015 date of order 08.02.2019 5. We have considered rival submission as well as relevant material on record. In the revision order passed u/s 263 the Pr. CIT has simply set aside the original order of the AO…

The Dy CIT1 (1), Indore vs. M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 61/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

…be utilized other than the purpose providing in the regulations. He has supported the impugned order of the CIT(A) and also relied upon following decisions: 1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. vs. CIT 41 ITR 608 (SC) 2. Monghyr Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 15 (Patna) 3. DCIT vs. Sabarmati Gas Co. Ltd. (ITANo.2956/Ahd/2010) date of order 02.03.2016 4. DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. (ITANo.3800/Del/2015 date of order 08.02.2019 5. We have considered rival submission as well as relevant material on record. In the revision order passed u/s 263 the Pr. CIT has simply set aside the original order of the AO…

M.P.Pashchim Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co Ltd, Indore vs. The Dy CIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 108/IND/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

…be utilized other than the purpose providing in the regulations. He has supported the impugned order of the CIT(A) and also relied upon following decisions: 1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. vs. CIT 41 ITR 608 (SC) 2. Monghyr Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 15 (Patna) 3. DCIT vs. Sabarmati Gas Co. Ltd. (ITANo.2956/Ahd/2010) date of order 02.03.2016 4. DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. (ITANo.3800/Del/2015 date of order 08.02.2019 5. We have considered rival submission as well as relevant material on record. In the revision order passed u/s 263 the Pr. CIT has simply set aside the original order of the AO…

Sabarmati Gas Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1607/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT DR &
Section 250(6)

…ipment of expenditure for bringing into existence a capital asset has been held as capital in nature. This is further supported by the decisions in the cases ofCIT Vs. Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. 14ITR 622 (Bom) and Monghyr Electric Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. ClT 26 ITR 15(Patna). Accordingly, this ground of appeal is allowed and the addition ofRs.5,28,72,901/- is deleted." I do not find any reason to disagree with the decision of my predecessor, where the facts of the case, the arguments of the AO and the contentions of the appellant are essentially the same. Accordingly, the ground of appeal is allowed and the addi…

The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Gandhinagar vs. Sabarmati Gas Limited, Gandhinagar

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1533/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT DR &
Section 250(6)

…ipment of expenditure for bringing into existence a capital asset has been held as capital in nature. This is further supported by the decisions in the cases ofCIT Vs. Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. 14ITR 622 (Bom) and Monghyr Electric Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. ClT 26 ITR 15(Patna). Accordingly, this ground of appeal is allowed and the addition ofRs.5,28,72,901/- is deleted." I do not find any reason to disagree with the decision of my predecessor, where the facts of the case, the arguments of the AO and the contentions of the appellant are essentially the same. Accordingly, the ground of appeal is allowed and the addi…

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3688/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 154

…Supply Co. (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT: 5 Taxman 116 (Del) − Ranchi Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT: 16 Taxman 213 (Pat.) − CIT vs. Cochin Electric Co: 57 ITR 82 (Ker.) − CIT vs. Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.: 14 ITR 622 (Bom) − Monghyr Electric Supply Co. vs. CIT: 26 ITR 15 (Orissa.) 16.7. Further, even in the impugned assessment order, the assessing officer has merely emphasized on the point that since the assessee-company is primarily a service provider, the charges received from consumers were revenue in nature, without appreciating that the said charges were actually received as reimbursement towards incurring ca…

1. Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. v. CIT (26 ITR 15) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax