3. CIT v. Alps Chemicals Ltd.

117 ITD 376Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#22113 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing 3. CIT v. Alps Chemicals Ltd.

M/S. Schutz Dishman Biotech Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-8, Ahmedabad

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1947/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1909/Ahd/2015 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1947/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11) 1.The Dcit 1. Schutz Disman बनाम/ Circe-8, Ahmedabad Biotech Ltd. Vs. Ahmedabad 2. Schutz Dishman Biotech 2. The Dcit Ltd. Circle-8 Bhadraraj Chambers Ahmedabad Nr.Swastik Cross Road Navrangpura, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs 0988C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellants) (""यथ" / Respondents) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani & Shri Parimal Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Jalwani, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Jalwani, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 36(1)(va)Section 41

…ced on followings: 1. DCIT vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals – ITA No.692/Ahd/2011 & others. 2. CIT vs. Priyanka Gems – Tax Appeal No.1468 of 2006 and others. 3. CIT vs. Alps Chemicals Ltd. – Tax Appeal No.677 of 2007. 4. Ito vs. Banyan Chemicals P.Ltd. 117 ITD 376 (Ahd)(TM). 56.1. The Ld.AR submitted that accordingly, the deduction u/10B should be allowed on foreign exchange gain. ITA No.1947/Ahd/2015(by Assessee) & Schutz Dishman Biotech Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year - 2010-11 57. The Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 58. We have heard the Ld. Representatives appearing for the…

The DCIT, Circle-8, Ahmedabad vs. Schutz Dishman Biotech Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1909/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1909/Ahd/2015 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1947/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11) 1.The Dcit 1. Schutz Disman बनाम/ Circe-8, Ahmedabad Biotech Ltd. Vs. Ahmedabad 2. Schutz Dishman Biotech 2. The Dcit Ltd. Circle-8 Bhadraraj Chambers Ahmedabad Nr.Swastik Cross Road Navrangpura, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs 0988C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellants) (""यथ" / Respondents) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani & Shri Parimal Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Jalwani, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Jalwani, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 36(1)(va)Section 41

…ced on followings: 1. DCIT vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals – ITA No.692/Ahd/2011 & others. 2. CIT vs. Priyanka Gems – Tax Appeal No.1468 of 2006 and others. 3. CIT vs. Alps Chemicals Ltd. – Tax Appeal No.677 of 2007. 4. Ito vs. Banyan Chemicals P.Ltd. 117 ITD 376 (Ahd)(TM). 56.1. The Ld.AR submitted that accordingly, the deduction u/10B should be allowed on foreign exchange gain. ITA No.1947/Ahd/2015(by Assessee) & Schutz Dishman Biotech Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year - 2010-11 57. The Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 58. We have heard the Ld. Representatives appearing for the…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle(4), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Shree Ambica Polymer P.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3086/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3086/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Appellant: Mr.Satish Karnani, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Divyakant Parikh, AR

…some of which are noted hereunder:- (i) CIT vs. Amba Impex (2006) 282 ITR 144 (Guj.) (ii) Priyanka Gems (2014) 267 CTR 480 (Guj.) (iii) Pr.CIT vs. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (2016) 240 Taxman 686 (Guj.) (iv) ITO vs. Banyan Chemicals (P.) Ltd. (2009) 117 ITD 376 (Ahd.)[TM]. (v) ACIT vs. M/s.Chand Engineering in ITA No.168 (Asr)/2010 – AY 2006-07, order dated 10/06/2011. (vi) Renaissance Jewellery (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO (2006) 101 ITD 380 (Mum.). 6. The issue being fairly settled in favour of the assessee by long line of precedents, we are unable to see any infirmity to the order of CIT(A). 7. In the result…

3. CIT v. Alps Chemicals Ltd. (117 ITD 376) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax