2012) 253 CTR 227 (Jharkhand) (iv) Asia Power Projects P Ltd. v. DCIT

370 ITR 257High Court2015#11622 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 37(1)

Judgments citing 2012) 253 CTR 227 (Jharkhand) (iv) Asia Power Projects P Ltd. v. DCIT

MAHANAGAR GAS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX

ITA 505/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri P.P. JayramanFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…elhi) (ii) Binani Cement Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2016) 380 ITR 116 (Calcutta) (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Tata Robins Fraser Ltd. reported in (2012) 253 CTR 227 (Jharkhand) (iv) Asia Power Projects P Ltd. vs. DCIT reported in 370 ITR 257 (Karnataka), and (v) M/s.Thiruvengadam Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax in T.C.(A) No.583 of 2007 dated 05.01.2016, which was followed by a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.Prasad Productions in T.C. (A) No.905 of 2008 dated 04.04.2018. 15. Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel f…

MAHANAGAR GAS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC

ITA 1694/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri P.P. JayramanFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…elhi) (ii) Binani Cement Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2016) 380 ITR 116 (Calcutta) (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Tata Robins Fraser Ltd. reported in (2012) 253 CTR 227 (Jharkhand) (iv) Asia Power Projects P Ltd. vs. DCIT reported in 370 ITR 257 (Karnataka), and (v) M/s.Thiruvengadam Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax in T.C.(A) No.583 of 2007 dated 05.01.2016, which was followed by a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.Prasad Productions in T.C. (A) No.905 of 2008 dated 04.04.2018. 15. Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel f…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. CHAITHANYA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1350/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Chaithanya Projects Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy No. 104, 3Rd Floor, Commissioner Of Prestige Omega, Income Tax, Epip Zone, Circle- 2(1) (1), Whitefield, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 066. Pan: Aabcc4930H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nitish Ranjan, Ca : Smt. H. Kabila, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 25-08-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-10-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Revenue Against Order Dated 25/03/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-2, Bangalore, For Assessment Year 2014-15 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “(I)Cit(A) Erred In Fact & Law In Holding That The Expenditure Incurred Towards A New Project Of "Health Park", Which Was Capitalized In The Books Of The Assessee, Was Incurred Towards The Existing Business Of 'Development & Construction Of Real Estate Property'.

For Appellant: Shri Nitish Ranjan, CA
Section 143(2)

…and developing health Park forms part of assessees existing business Page 7 of 7 activity as one of the project undertaken. We draw our support from decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Asia Power Projects (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported in (2015) 370 ITR 257 and Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Binani Cement Ltd. Vs. CIT & Anr. reported in (2016) 380 ITR 116. 10. Based on the above discussion, we do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Ld.CIT(A). We therefore do not find any merit in the ground raised by revenue. Accordingly the ground raised by revenue stands dismissed. In the resul…

HINDUSTAN STEELWORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1147/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37

…ively during the course of relevant business. Their lordship, earlier judgment in CIT vs Alom Industries Ltd. in ITA 724 of 2004 decided on 17.08.2015, Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. vs CIT (2011) 333 ITR 18 (Del) and Asia Power Project (P) Ltd. vs DCIT (2015) 370 ITR 257 (Karnataka) also reiterate the very view. We accept assessee’s impugned identical loss claim in both assessment years therefore. Its former appeal ITA 1146 succeeds accordingly. 3. This leaves us with assessee’s second substantive ground in AY 2008- 09 seeking to reverse both the lower authorities’ action adding prior period income of Rs. 33.60…

HINDUSTAN STEELWORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1146/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37

…ively during the course of relevant business. Their lordship, earlier judgment in CIT vs Alom Industries Ltd. in ITA 724 of 2004 decided on 17.08.2015, Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. vs CIT (2011) 333 ITR 18 (Del) and Asia Power Project (P) Ltd. vs DCIT (2015) 370 ITR 257 (Karnataka) also reiterate the very view. We accept assessee’s impugned identical loss claim in both assessment years therefore. Its former appeal ITA 1146 succeeds accordingly. 3. This leaves us with assessee’s second substantive ground in AY 2008- 09 seeking to reverse both the lower authorities’ action adding prior period income of Rs. 33.60…

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 5986/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dr. K. ShivaramFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80

…ttlement agreement vis-à-vis Arbitral Award and the termination letter before concluding that the liability did not crystallized during this Assessment Year. 35. Further, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Asia Power Projects (P.) Ltd., v. DCIT [370 ITR 257] while considering the allowability of expenditure on abandoned projects, it was held that even though the assessee invoked arbitration clause and pending the expenditure on abandoned project should be allowed in the year in which the contract is terminated. 36. In view of above discussion, we feel it appropriate to restore this issue to the fil…

ADITYA BIRLA POWER CO.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 8(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1115/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1115/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2007-08) Aditya Birla Power Company Limited Assistant Commissioner Of C-1, Aditya Birla Centre Income Tax -8(1) बनाम/ Room No.204, 2Nd Floor S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 030 Aaykar Bhavan Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aabcb-7067-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.Dr Assessee By : Yogesh Thar & Hardik Nirmal, Ld.Ar’S सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/07/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 07/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Yogesh Thar & Hardik Nirmal, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37(1)

…Taxman 277 (Delhi) (ii) Binani Cement Ltd. v. CIT [2016] 380 ITR 116/[2015] 233 Taxman 340/60 taxmann.com 384 (Cal.) (iii) CIT v. Tata Robins Fraser Ltd. [2012] 211 Taxman 257/26 taxmann.com 15 (Jharkhand) (iv) Asia Power Projects (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2015] 370 ITR 257/[2014] 49 taxmann.com 428/226 Taxman 136 (Mag.) (Kar.), and (v) Thiruvengadam Investments (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [T.C.(A) No. 583 of 2007, 11 Aditya Birla Power Company Limited Assessment Year-2007-08 dated 5-1-2016], which was followed by a Division Bench of this Court in CIT v. Prasad Productions [T.C. (A) No. 905 of 2008, dated 4-4-2018]. 15…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EIH LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 348/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…ase of CIT vs Alcove Industries Ltd in ITA No. 724 of 2004 dated 17.8.2015 32 ITA Nos.348-314/K/2011 & CO No.23/K/2011 EIH Limited AY 2006-07 (c ) Decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Asia Power Projects (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2015) 370 ITR 257 (Kar) Respectfully following the ratio laid down in the aforesaid judgements, we allow the claim of assessee in respect of advances written off in the sum of Rs. 2,01,50,000/- as deduction in the year under appeal. Accordingly, the Ground No. 11 raised by the assessee is allowed. 14. Disallowance on account of provision for leave encashment – Rs…

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 314/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…ase of CIT vs Alcove Industries Ltd in ITA No. 724 of 2004 dated 17.8.2015 32 ITA Nos.348-314/K/2011 & CO No.23/K/2011 EIH Limited AY 2006-07 (c ) Decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Asia Power Projects (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2015) 370 ITR 257 (Kar) Respectfully following the ratio laid down in the aforesaid judgements, we allow the claim of assessee in respect of advances written off in the sum of Rs. 2,01,50,000/- as deduction in the year under appeal. Accordingly, the Ground No. 11 raised by the assessee is allowed. 14. Disallowance on account of provision for leave encashment – Rs…

2012) 253 CTR 227 (Jharkhand) (iv) Asia Power Projects P Ltd. v. DCIT (370 ITR 257) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax