336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT v. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd.

36 ITR 490High Court2014#12724 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Judgments citing 336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT v. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd.

TPR AUTOPARTS MFG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 25(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4744/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Tpr Autoparts Mfg. India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Mayur Batra & Co., Ca, Circle-25(2), 7, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aacct9433D (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Deptt. By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit, Dr & Ms Nidhi Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th December, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-44, New Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Company Is A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of M/S Teikoku Piston Ring Co. Ltd. (Japan). It Had Been Incorporated On 27.03.2008 With The Main Object To Carry On The Business To Manufacture, Export, Buy & Sell & Otherwise Deal In ‘Moulded’ Automobile Products I.E. Piston Rings, Cylinder Liners, Valve Seat Rings & Other Automotive Parts. It Is The Third Year Of Its Existence, Though Effectively It Is The Second Year Of Production After Its Set Up & Commencement Of Business In The Fy 2009-10. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.11.2011 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.6,45,23,822/-. Since The Assessee Had Entered Into Certain International Transactions With Its Aes, The Assessing Officer Referred The Matter To The Transfer Pricing Officer U/S 92Ca Of The Act For Determination Of The Arm’S Length Price Of Such International Transactions. The Tpo, During The Course Of Tp Assessment Proceedings, Observed That The Assessee Company Has Undertaken The Following International Transactions With Its Aes:- No. Nature Of Transaction Method Amount (In Rs.) Purchase Of Raw 1 5,85,47,963 Materials/Assets/Spares Tnmm Payment Of Royalty 76,32,183 2 Tnmm 3 Reimbursement Of Expenses To Ae 9,14,253 -

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate
Section 92C

…(P.) Ltd reported in [2019] 107 taxmann.com 423 (Pune - Trib.) (v) CIT vs. Tupperware India (Pvt.) Ltd. [2015] 53 Taxmann.com 232 (Delhi) 12 CIT vs. Malerkotls Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT vs. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. [2014] 36 ITR 490 (Madras) (viii) CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 556 (Delhi) (ix) CIT vs. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. in ITA NO. 171/2010 dated. 17.10.2011 (Del) (x) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. [2018] 89 taxmann.com 191(Delhi) (xi) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 124 ITR 1(SC) 14. The ld. DR, on the other hand, has heavily relied on the…

FCG FLAMEPROOF CONROL GEARS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6702/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No. 6702/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम/ M/S. Fcg Flameproof The Acit, Range 6(2), Control Gears Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Vs. Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Army & Navy Bldg., 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2688K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Jitendra Jain ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Pawan Kumar Beerla सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :10.12.2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :16.12.2015 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Pawan Kumar

…itten off during the year did not have a lifespan of more than a year, most of the items were moulds which have been considered as items of revenue in nature by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd 36 ITR 490. The Ld. Counsel pleaded that looking into the nature of items, the entire write off should be allowed as revenue in nature. 4 ITA. No. 6702/M/2013 7. The Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the findings of the AO. 8. We have gone through the orders of the authorities below. We have also given a thoughtful consideration to the list of i…

336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT v. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. (36 ITR 490) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax