2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT v. Sundaram Clayton Ltd.

141 ITR 745High Court#9606 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2022.

Judgments citing 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT v. Sundaram Clayton Ltd.

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2299/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Vs. 129, Park Street Kolkata Kolkata-17 (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 129, Park Street Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Revenue : Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee Are Arising Out Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-22, Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 14/Cit(A)-22/14-15/16-17/Kol Dated 31.02.2018 Against The Order Of Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act), Dated 31.12.2016 For Ay 2014-15. 2. Before Us, Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Represented The Revenue. Ld. Counsel For The Ita No. 2299/Kol/2019 By Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. Ays 2014-15 Assessee Has Placed On Record, A Brief Note On The Submissions Made Along With Paper Books & Chart Substantiate The Claims Made By The Assessee In The Assessment Year Under Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate and Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kamat, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80ISection 8O

…on record. We find that the issue in hand is covered by various Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of DClT vs Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri reported in 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd reported in 1331TR 34 (Mad), CIT vs Wheels India Ltd reported in 141 ITR 745 (Med) and Arati Industries Ltd Vs DCIT reported in 95 TTJ 14 (Ahm) as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR of the assessee before us. We find that the AO following the same allowed the deduction and relevant finding of which is reproduced herein below: “With respect to the second issue the assessee submitted that ".....other income' of Rs.15,86,OOO/-…

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2295/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

…on record. We find that the issue in hand is covered by various Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of DClT vs Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri reported in 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd reported in 1331TR 34 (Mad), CIT vs Wheels India Ltd reported in 141 ITR 745 (Med) and Arati Industries Ltd Vs DCIT reported in 95 TTJ 14 (Ahm) as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR of the assessee ITA Nos.2294 & 2295/Kol/2019 by Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 before us. We find that the AO following the same allowed the deduction and relevant finding of which is reproduced herein below: “With respe…

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2294/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

…on record. We find that the issue in hand is covered by various Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of DClT vs Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri reported in 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd reported in 1331TR 34 (Mad), CIT vs Wheels India Ltd reported in 141 ITR 745 (Med) and Arati Industries Ltd Vs DCIT reported in 95 TTJ 14 (Ahm) as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR of the assessee ITA Nos.2294 & 2295/Kol/2019 by Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 before us. We find that the AO following the same allowed the deduction and relevant finding of which is reproduced herein below: “With respe…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1741/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Vs. 129, Park Street Kolkata Kolkata-17 (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 129, Park Street Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Revenue : Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee Are Arising Out Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-22, Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 14/Cit(A)-22/14-15/16-17/Kol Dated 31.02.2018 Against The Order Of Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act), Dated 31.12.2016 For Ay 2014-15. 2. Before Us, Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Represented The Revenue. Ld. Counsel For The Ita No. 2299/Kol/2019 By Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. Ays 2014-15 Assessee Has Placed On Record, A Brief Note On The Submissions Made Along With Paper Books & Chart Substantiate The Claims Made By The Assessee In The Assessment Year Under Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate and Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kamat, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80ISection 8O

…on record. We find that the issue in hand is covered by various Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of DClT vs Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri reported in 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd reported in 1331TR 34 (Mad), CIT vs Wheels India Ltd reported in 141 ITR 745 (Med) and Arati Industries Ltd Vs DCIT reported in 95 TTJ 14 (Ahm) as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR of the assessee before us. We find that the AO following the same allowed the deduction and relevant finding of which is reproduced herein below: “With respect to the second issue the assessee submitted that ".....other income' of Rs.15,86,OOO/-…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 918/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

…on record. We find that the issue in hand is covered by various Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of DClT vs Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri reported in 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd reported in 1331TR 34 (Mad), CIT vs Wheels India Ltd reported in 141 ITR 745 (Med) and Arati Industries Ltd Vs DCIT reported in 95 TTJ 14 (Ahm) as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR of the assessee ITA Nos.2294 & 2295/Kol/2019 by Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 before us. We find that the AO following the same allowed the deduction and relevant finding of which is reproduced herein below: “With respe…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 917/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

…on record. We find that the issue in hand is covered by various Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of DClT vs Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri reported in 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd reported in 1331TR 34 (Mad), CIT vs Wheels India Ltd reported in 141 ITR 745 (Med) and Arati Industries Ltd Vs DCIT reported in 95 TTJ 14 (Ahm) as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR of the assessee ITA Nos.2294 & 2295/Kol/2019 by Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 before us. We find that the AO following the same allowed the deduction and relevant finding of which is reproduced herein below: “With respe…

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

…e CIT Appeal has rightly taken the said income which was from the sale of Scrap as income derived from industrial undertaking. Learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on three judgments reported in 336 ITR 444 (Del.) (CIT Vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd.), 141 ITR 745 (Mad) (CIT Vs. Wheels India Ltd.) and 258 ITR 785 (Guj.) (DCIT Vs. Harijivandas Juthabhai Zaveri). Section 80- HH contemplates deduction on profits and gains derived from the industrial undertaking. The issue is as to whether the income of Rs. 63,66,932/- can be said to be income derived from industrial undertaking or not? The assessee's submissi…

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

…e CIT Appeal has rightly taken the said income which was from the sale of Scrap as income derived from industrial undertaking. Learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on three judgments reported in 336 ITR 444 (Del.) (CIT Vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd.), 141 ITR 745 (Mad) (CIT Vs. Wheels India Ltd.) and 258 ITR 785 (Guj.) (DCIT Vs. Harijivandas Juthabhai Zaveri). Section 80- HH contemplates deduction on profits and gains derived from the industrial undertaking. The issue is as to whether the income of Rs. 63,66,932/- can be said to be income derived from industrial undertaking or not? The assessee's submissi…

D.C.I.T CIR - 12,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1105/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(1)Section 80I

…on record. We find that the issue in hand is covered by various Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of DClT vs Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri reported in 2581TR 785 (GUj), ClT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd reported in 1331TR 34 (Mad), CIT vs Wheels India Ltd reported in 141 ITR 745 (Med) and Arati 7 | P a g e I T A N o s . 1 1 0 5 , 1 4 0 3 / K o l / 1 3 M / s . B e r g e r P a i n t s ( I ) L t d Industries Ltd Vs DCIT reported in 95 TTJ 14 (Ahm) as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR of the assessee before us. We find that the AO following the same allowed the deduction and relevant finding of which is reproduced herein bel…

ASST CIT LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT, MUMBAI vs. GLENMARK GENERICS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5515/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.5515/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम/ The Acit, M/S. Glenmark Generics Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, B/2, Mahalaxmi Chambers, Vs. Centre-1, 29Th Floor, 22, Bhulabhai Desai Road, World Trade Centre, Mumbai -400 026 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaccg 9820D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Ms. Bharti M. Singh ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :01.02.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :05 .02.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N. Prasad, Jm:

For Appellant: Ms. Bharti M. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 80Section 80I

…India) Ltd. Vs. CIT (241 ITR 803) the Hon. ITAT held that profit from sale of the scrap material was eligible for deduction u/s. 80HH.” 6. On the basis of the above facts we have examined few precedents namely Fenner (India) Ltd., 241 ITR 803, Wheels (I) Ltd. 141 ITR 745. The observation of the courts were that a deduction can be claimed only in respect of profits derived from an industrial undertaking. An industrial undertaking itself must be the source of that profit. Observation has also been made that it is wrong to say that the scrap has no direct nexus with industrial undertaking manufacturing such products…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SPORTKING INDIA LIMITED

ITA/1232/2008HC Delhi19 Aug 2009
Section 143(3)Section 260Section 80Section 80I

…se of Pandian Chemicals has held that sale of scrap is not a revenue receipt derived from business though the same was held eligible by the Madras High Court in the earlier cases of CIT vs. Sundaram Clayton Ltd., 133 ITR 34 and CIT vs. Wheels India Ltd., 141 ITR 745. So far as the judgment of Pandian Chemicals holds that the profit amount received from the insurance company is not a revenue receipt, the same would be at divergence with the view of the Supreme Court in the case of Raghuvanshi Mills Ltd. (supra). We note that the Pandian Chemicals case does not refer to the decision of the Supreme Court…