260 ITR 193 (Mad), CIT v. C.L. Gupta: 259 ITR513 (All.), CIT v. Raj and Sans Deep Ltd.

206 ITR 96Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1994#19824 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,487 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2020.

Judgments citing 260 ITR 193 (Mad), CIT v. C.L. Gupta: 259 ITR513 (All.), CIT v. Raj and Sans Deep Ltd.

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Asea Brown Boveri Ltd

ITA/420/2012HC Karnataka24 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

Section 143(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 40Section 43BSection 80H

…e first time before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Supreme Court in BERGER PAINTS (INDIA) LTD., supra has quoted with approval the observation made by the special bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in INDIAN COMMUNICATION P. LTD., IAC, (1994) 206 ITR 96 to the effect that whether full deduction was allowed in one year or partly in one year 19 and partly in the next, since, the assessee is a company and the rate of tax is uniform the gain to one and loss to other is illusory, since, what is referred is one year would have to be discharged in the next. It was further held that in t…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…R 43 (Bom) • CIT v. NCR Corporation India (P) Ltd.: 240 Taxman 598 (Kar.) • Chemicals and Plastics India Ltd. v. CIT : 260 ITR 193 (Mad) • CIT vs. C.L. Gupta: 259 ITR 513 (All.) • CIT v. Raj and Sans Deep Ltd: 293 ITR 12 (P&H) • Indian Communication Network : 206 ITR 96 (ITAT - SB) • DCIT v Glaxo SmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd: 107 ITD 343 (SB) (Chd.) • Hind Lamps Ltd. DCIT: ITA No. 283/D/92 (Agra) • Euro RSCG Advertising (P) Ltd v. ACIT : [2013] 154 TTJ 389 (Mum) The Ld. AR further submitted that the aforesaid issue is, in principle, also covered by the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in assessee’s own…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…: 252 ITR 43 (Bom), CIT v. NCR Corporation India (P) Ltd. : 240 Taxman 598 (Kar.), Chemicals and Plastics India Ltd. v. CIT : 260 ITR 193 (Mad), CIT v. C.L. Gupta: 259 ITR513 (All.), CIT v. Raj and Sans Deep Ltd: 293 ITR 12 (P&H), Indian Communication Network 206 ITR 96 (ITAT – SB), DCIT v. Glaxo SmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd: 107 ITD 343 (SB) (Chd.), Hind Lamps Ltd. DCIT: ITA No. 283/D/92 (Agra), Euro RSCG Advertising (P) Ltd v. ACIT : 154 TTJ 389 (Mum), he submitted that the aggregate amount of Rs.66,23,77,487 was allowable as deduction to the assessee under section 43B of the Act. Ld. AR further submitted…

M/s Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result the appeal is allowed and

ITA/501/2007HC Delhi20 Apr 2009

For Appellant: Mr R. Santhanam, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr R.D. Jolly, Advocate

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 43B

…on judgments of the Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s Lakhanpal National Ltd vs ITO; (1986) 162 ITR 240 as well as that of Delhi Bench B (Spl. Bench) of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Communication Network (P) Ltd vs 2009:DHC:1515-DB IAC; (1994) 206 ITR 96 (AT) and ITO vs Food Specialities Ltd, dated 02.02.1994 ITAT (Delhi) to contend that, it was the intention of the legislature to allow deduction in respect of customs and excise duty while computing the income of an assessee under Section 28 of the Act in the year in which the said tax was actually paid by the assessee. The only impediment…