286 ITR 201/122 Taxman 516 (Mad.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT

231 CTR 348High Court2010#11353 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 194A Section 194H Section 2(28A)Section 201(1)Section 201(1A)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 2(28a)section 133a(2a)section 80h section 194h section 80hhc interest under section 201(1a)section 80hh interest on securities section 194a section 201(1a)section 57 section 36(1)(iii)

Judgments citing 286 ITR 201/122 Taxman 516 (Mad.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, TIRUNELVELI vs. VVD AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1792/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1792/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Tirunelveli. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Vvd & Sons Private Vs. Limited, No.182, Palayamkottai Road, Tuticorin – 628 003. Pan: Aaacv 8438J (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri Shiva Srinivas, Addl.Cit Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2024 आदेश /O R Der Per S.R. Raghunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai 19, Dated 30.04.2024 & Pertains To

Section 4Section 801Section 801ASection 80I

…est income as eligible for deduction u/s.80IA of the Act – i) Nirma Industries Ltd., vs. DCIT, [2006] 155 Taxman 330 (Guj) ii) Gujarat Paguthan Energy Corporation (P.) Ltd., vs. DCIT, [2014] 45 taxmann.com 564 (Guj) iii) CIT vs. Jackson Engineers Ltd., [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi) iv)CIT vs. Poddar Pigments Limited, ITA 347/2010 (Delhi) v) CIT vs. Advance Detergents Ltd., [2010] 33 DTR 185 (Delhi) vi) Phatela Cotgin Industries (P.) Ltd., vs. CIT, [2008] 303 ITR 411 (P&H) vii) Tata Sponge Iron Ltd., vs. CIT, [2007] 292 ITR 175 viii) CIT vs. Flender Macneill Gears Ltd., [1984] 41 CTR (Cal) 60 ix)CIT vs. Indo Matsushi…

DCIT(OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. WOCKHARDT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2633/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 194ASection 194HSection 2Section 201Section 201(1)Section 222Section 271C

…following decisions: Sl. No(s). Decision in the case of... Reported in... 1. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201/122 Тахman 516 (Mad.), 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 3. CIT v. Jackson Engineers Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P. Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 / 166 Taxman 9 (Punj. & Har.); ITA. No. 2633/MUM/2024 Wockhardt Ltd, Mumbai. 6. Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 175/165 Taxman 191 (Ori.). 6. We have carefully perused the decision of the Hon'ble Juri…

DCIT (TDS)(OSD) - 2(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. WOCKHARDT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2131/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit (Tds) (Osd)-2(3), M/S Wockhardt Ltd., Room No. 310, 3Rd Floor, Mtnl Wockhardt Towers, Bandra Building, Cumballa Hill, Vs. Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400026. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaacw 2472 M Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Pranay Gandhi, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 20/12/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 30/12/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Pranay Gandhi, AR

Section 194H

…ad.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 3. CIT v. Jackson Enginee 3. CIT v. Jackson Engineers Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi); rs Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); M/s Wackardt Ltd. 11 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P. Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P…

DCIT (TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. WOCKHARDT LIMITED, MUMBAI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2314/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vallabh Gokhale, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, D.R

Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…owing decisions: Sl. No(s). Decision in the case of... Reported in... 1. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201/122 Taxman 516 (Mad.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 3. CIT v. Jackson Engineers Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P. Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 / 166 Taxman 9 (Punj. & Har.); 6. Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 175 / 165 Taxman 191 (Ori.). 6. We have carefully perused the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, Nirma Industries Lt…

JCIT (OSD) (TDS)-2(3). MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S WOCKHARDT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012–

ITA 894/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli

Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…following decisions: Sl. No(s). Decision in the case of... Reported in... 1. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201/122 Taxman 516 (Mad.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 3. CIT v. Jackson Engineers Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P. Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 / 166 Taxman 9 (Punj. & Har.); 6. Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 175 / 165 Taxman 191 (Ori.). 6. We have carefully perused the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, Nirma Industries Ltd. (…

JCIT (OSD) (TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI., MUMBAI. vs. M/S WOCKHARDT LTD , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012–

ITA 893/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli

Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

DCIT (TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. WOCKHARDT LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the grounds (c) raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6803/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6803/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit (Tds)-2(3), M/S Wockhardt Ltd. 6Th Floor, Wockhardt Smt. K. G. Mittal बिधम/ Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Tower, G Block, Bandra Vs. Room No. 718, 7Th Floor, Kurla Complex, Bandra, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 002 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaacw2472M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & C.O. No. 51/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S Wockhardt Ltd. Dcit (Tds)-2(3), 6Th Floor, Wockhardt Smt. K. G. Mittal बिधम/ Tower, G Block, Bandra Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Vs. Room No. 718, 7Th Floor, Kurla Complex, Bandra, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 002 (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anand Mohan, Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Kirit Kamdar, Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 02.11.2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 11.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mohan, DRFor Respondent: Shri Kirit Kamdar, AR

Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201(1)

…ing decisions :— Sl. No(s). Decision in the case of... Reported in... 1. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201 / 122 Taxman 516 (Mad.) 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.) 3. CIT v. Jackson Engineers Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi) 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi) 13 I.T.A. No. 6803/Mum/2018 & CO 51/Mum/2020 M/s Wockhardt Ltd. 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P. Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 / 166 Taxman 9 (Punj. & Har.) 6. Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 175 / 165 Taxman 191 (Ori.) 6. We have carefully perused the decision o…

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. SH SUNIL PARKASH, FARIDABAD

ITA 5683/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 194Section 40Section 80I

…P Structures, Jammu. Dispute relating to disallowance of claim of deduction u/s. 80IC of the Act in respect of M/s GSP Projects, Kashipur, Uttarakhand. The CIT(A) followed the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Jackson Engineers Ltd. (231 CTR 348) and further held that the DG set is the final product which has a distinctive name, character and function different from each of the components. The CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. As relates to disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act on the excise duty refund received by two units namely…

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. SH. SUNIL PARKASH, FARIDABAD

ITA 2955/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 194Section 40Section 80I