42 to 45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd.

1 SCC 108Reported decision1996#7174 most cited

What is 42 to 45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. authority for?

If an applicant satisfies the conditions of an exemption notification, the notification should be construed liberally.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2002 to 2024.

Also referred to as

State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. · exemption notification · liberal construction · conditions satisfied · tax exemption

Judgments citing 42 to 45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd.

The Commissioner of Income Tax -International Taxation-1 vs. Reema Chawla

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/168/2024HC Delhi11 Mar 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 54

…tion should be construed liberally. [See Commissioner, Trade Tax v. DSM Group of Industries (2005) 1 SCC 657 (SCC para 26) ; TISCO Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand (2005) 4 SCC 272 (SCC paras 42- 45) ; State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. (1996) 1 SCC 108 ; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs [1994] Supp (3) SCC 606 ; A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2007) 2 SCC 725 and Reiz Electrocontrols (P.) Ltd. v. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is download…

The Commissioner of Income Tax -International Taxation-1 vs. Reema Chawla

Appeals are dismissed

ITA - 168 / 2024HC Delhi11 Mar 2024
Section 54

…tion should be construed liberally. [See Commissioner, Trade Tax v. DSM Group of Industries (2005) 1 SCC 657 (SCC para 26) ; TISCO Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand (2005) 4 SCC 272 (SCC paras 42- 45) ; State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. (1996) 1 SCC 108 ; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs [1994] Supp (3) SCC 606 ; A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2007) 2 SCC 725 and Reiz Electrocontrols (P.) Ltd. v. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is download…

M/S Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

ITA/204/2013HC Karnataka27 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260Section 260ASection 80I

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY I.T.A. NO.204 OF 2013 BETWEEN: M/S. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER SRI. ANANDA NAIK CORPORATE OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR K.R. CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560001. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. M. LAVA, ADV.,) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 11(2), R.P. BHAVAN OPP. RBI, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) - - -…

Kapil Kumar Agarwal, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2630/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishikapil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Dcit, C/O. Ipsaa House Anm & Circle-1(1), Associates, J021A, Mayfiled Gurgaoon Gardens, Sector-51, Gurgaon Pan: Aacpa2412L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sugandha Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 54Section 54F

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kapil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. DCIT, C/o. IPSAA House ANM & Circle-1(1), Associates, J021A, Mayfiled Gurgaoon Gardens, Sector-51, Gurgaon PAN: AACPA2412L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Piyush Kaushik, Adv Revenue by: Smt Sugandha Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/03/2019 Date of pronouncement 30/04/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee, individual against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 1, Gu…

The ITO, Kollam vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 477/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…was involuntary or tendered under coercion or duren. No such circumstances existed or proved to have existed. In saying so we are supported by the observation of their Lordship of the Supreme Court in the case of Surjit Singh Chabra vs. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 108. iii) Carpenters Classics (Exim) P. Ltd vs. DCIT (108 ITD 142) (ITAT, Bang.) iv) CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540) (SC) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) v) V.Kunhambu & Sons vs. CIT (219 ITR 235) (Ker.) vi) Ravindra D. Trivedi vs. CIT 215 CTR 313 (Raj.) For retraction to be valid, thre…

The ITO, Kollam vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 476/COCH/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…was involuntary or tendered under coercion or duren. No such circumstances existed or proved to have existed. In saying so we are supported by the observation of their Lordship of the Supreme Court in the case of Surjit Singh Chabra vs. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 108. iii) Carpenters Classics (Exim) P. Ltd vs. DCIT (108 ITD 142) (ITAT, Bang.) iv) CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540) (SC) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) v) V.Kunhambu & Sons vs. CIT (219 ITR 235) (Ker.) vi) Ravindra D. Trivedi vs. CIT 215 CTR 313 (Raj.) For retraction to be valid, thre…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 326/COCH/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…was involuntary or tendered under coercion or duren. No such circumstances existed or proved to have existed. In saying so we are supported by the observation of their Lordship of the Supreme Court in the case of Surjit Singh Chabra vs. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 108. iii) Carpenters Classics (Exim) P. Ltd vs. DCIT (108 ITD 142) (ITAT, Bang.) iv) CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540) (SC) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) v) V.Kunhambu & Sons vs. CIT (219 ITR 235) (Ker.) vi) Ravindra D. Trivedi vs. CIT 215 CTR 313 (Raj.) For retraction to be valid, thre…

ACIT, Cir-32, Kolkata vs. Jitendra Seth, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1420/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2012-13 Acit, Circle-32, Jitendra Seth बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, 87, Karnani Estate, 209, / 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-71 V/S. A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700 017 [Pan No.Ajhs 9552 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Challenges Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.03.2016 Passed In Case No. 749/Cit(A)-9/Cir-32/2014-15/Kol, Reversing Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Assessee’S Commission Paid Of ₹51,56,694/- As Well As Partly Restricting Section 54F Deduction Disallowance To ₹42,39,181/- Out Of ₹56,52,242/-; Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’ Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2012-13 ACIT, Circle-32, Jitendra Seth बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, 87, Karnani Estate, 209, / 2nd Floor, Kolkata-71 V/s. A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700 017 [PAN No.AJHS 9552 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-SR-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Miraj D Shah, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pron…

M/S Star Industries vs. Commissioner of Customs(Imports) Raigad

C.A. No.-006088-006088 - 2013Supreme Court07 Oct 2015
Section 108Section 110Section 111Section 3(1)

…ame, the exemption notification should be construed liberally. [See CTT v. DSM Group of Industries, (2005) 1 SCC 657 (SCC para 26); TISCO v. State of Jharkhand (2005) 4 SCC 272 (SCC paras 42 to 45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. (1996) 1 SCC 108; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs (1994 Supp. (3) SCC 606); A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2007) 2 SCC 725 and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd. v. CCE (2006) 6 SCC 213.” Civil Appeal No. 6088 of 2013 Page 29 of 32 Page 30 JUDGMENT Judged by this test, it is clear that a hot mix plant of the type mentioned alone is exe…

M/S Star Industries vs. Commissioner of Customs(Imports) Raigad

C.A. No.-006088-006088 - 2013Supreme Court07 Oct 2015
Section 108Section 110Section 111Section 3(1)

…ame, the exemption notification should be construed liberally. [See CTT v. DSM Group of Industries, (2005) 1 SCC 657 (SCC para 26); TISCO v. State of Jharkhand (2005) 4 SCC 272 (SCC paras 42 to 45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. (1996) 1 SCC 108; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs (1994 Supp. (3) SCC 606); A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2007) 2 SCC 725 and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd. v. CCE (2006) 6 SCC 213.” Civil Appeal No. 6088 of 2013 Page 29 of 32 Page 30 JUDGMENT Judged by this test, it is clear that a hot mix plant of the type mentioned alone is exe…

M/S Ivrcl. Infrastructure & Projects Ltd vs. Commnr. of Customs, Chennai

The appeal is dismissed with

C.A. No.-005282-005282 - 2004Supreme Court15 Apr 2015
Section 25(1)

…Page 1 JUDGMENT REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5282 OF 2004 M/S. IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURE & PROJECTS LTD. …APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI ...RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T R.F. Nariman, J. 1. The facts necessary to decide this appeal are as follows. The appellant entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with M/s Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Limited for the purpose of construction of roads in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Joint Venture was awarded a contract by the National Highways Aut…

M/S Ivrcl. Infrastructure & Projects Ltd vs. Commnr. of Customs, Chennai

The appeal is dismissed with

C.A. No.-005282-005282 - 2004Supreme Court15 Apr 2015
Section 25(1)

…Page 1 JUDGMENT REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5282 OF 2004 M/S. IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURE & PROJECTS LTD. …APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI ...RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T R.F. Nariman, J. 1. The facts necessary to decide this appeal are as follows. The appellant entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with M/s Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Limited for the purpose of construction of roads in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Joint Venture was awarded a contract by the National Highways Aut…

Commissioner of Income Tax - Xv vs. Bharti Mishra

ITA - 567 / 2013HC Delhi18 Dec 2013
Section 54Section 54F

…of 13 notification should be construed liberally. [See CTT v. DSM Group of Industries[(2005) 1 SCC 657] (SCC para 26); TISCO Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand [(2005) 4 SCC 272] (SCC paras 42- 45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. [(1996) 1 SCC 108] ; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs [1994 Supp (3) SCC 606] ; A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala[(2007) 2 SCC 725] and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd. v. CCE. [(2006) 6 SCC 213] ” 15. In view of the aforesaid position, we do not find any merit in the present appeal and the same is dismissed. S…

Commissioner of Income Tax - II vs. M/s. Healthware Private Limited

ITTA/204/2013HC Telangana04 Jul 2013

Commnr. of Central Excise, Shillong vs. M/S. North Eastern Tobacco Ltd

C.A. No.-000200-000201 - 2002Supreme Court28 Nov 2002
For Respondent: NORTH-EASTERN TOBACCO CO. LTD
Section 5A

…iple of interpreting an Exemption Notification is that as far as possible liberal interpretation should be imparted to the language thereof, provided no violence is done to the language employed. See State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd., [ 1996] 1 SCC 108. http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4 In the case of Morgardshammar India Ltd., (Supra), Section 4(A) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act contained definition of ’new unit’ for availing exemption from payment of sales tax. Explanation below Section 4(A) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act defined ’new unit’ to mean a ’factory or workshop whether…