(1) M/S. Rotork Controla India (P) Ltd. v. CIT

29 Taxmann.com 80High Court2013#15614 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2018.

Judgments citing (1) M/S. Rotork Controla India (P) Ltd. v. CIT

LANDIS+GYR LIMITED,SOUTH 24 PARGANAS vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(A), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 524/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A No. 524/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM ] I.T.A No. 524/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s Landis + Gyr Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata [PAN: AAACV 9922 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Kamal Sawhney, AR For the Respondent : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 25.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 17.10.2018 ORDER Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM This appeal by the assessee Asst Years 2012-13 of the Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) dated 08.12.2016 in which directions…

M/S. LUMAX INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 6961/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2010-11 Lumax Industries Ltd., Jcit, Range- 4, B-85/86, Mayapuri Industrial New Delhi. Vs. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaacl1126D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-11 Lumax Industries Ltd., JCIT, Range- 4, B-85/86, Mayapuri Industrial New Delhi. Vs. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. PAN : AAACL1126D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Adv. Department by : Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 07-09-2017 Date of pronouncement : 05-12-2017 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.11.2014 passed by the Addl.CIT, Rang…

DCIT CIR 3(3), MUMBAI vs. KAIL LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5716/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1855/MUM/2013 (A.Y: 2009-10) D.C.I.T., Circle – 3(3), v. M/s Kail Ltd., Room No. 609, 6th Floor, 171-C, Mittal Court, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN: AAACK 7417 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bhupendra Karkhanis Department by : Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen Date of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2017 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeals are filed by the Rev…

DCIT CIR 3(3), MUMBAI vs. KALI LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1855/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1855/MUM/2013 (A.Y: 2009-10) D.C.I.T., Circle – 3(3), v. M/s Kail Ltd., Room No. 609, 6th Floor, 171-C, Mittal Court, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN: AAACK 7417 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bhupendra Karkhanis Department by : Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen Date of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2017 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeals are filed by the Rev…

DCIT CIR 3(3), MUMBAI vs. KALI LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4415/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1855/MUM/2013 (A.Y: 2009-10) D.C.I.T., Circle – 3(3), v. M/s Kail Ltd., Room No. 609, 6th Floor, 171-C, Mittal Court, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN: AAACK 7417 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bhupendra Karkhanis Department by : Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen Date of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2017 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeals are filed by the Rev…

ANCHOR ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CEN.CIR.41, MUMBAI

In the result of appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6930/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…arranty, it was submitted that Ld. Counsel that the provision for warranty is not unascertained liability and therefore it cannot be added to the book profit u/s 115JB as was held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Beton Dickason India (P) Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 80 (DR). 13. Ld. Counsel also made an alternative prayer that in case any amount of disallowance his sustained, then the amount of profit eligible for deduction u/s 80IC should be accordingly increased and the benefit of deduction should be allowed on the higher amount of profit computed after the disallowance. It was further submitted by him…

(1) M/S. Rotork Controla India (P) Ltd. v. CIT (29 Taxmann.com 80) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax