60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

232 ITR 722High Court1998#10409 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2022.

Judgments citing 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

DILIP BUILDCON LTD ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

ITA 163/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Acit Central-1 Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent /Revenue) Pan: Aaccd 6124 B Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Shri Yash Kukreja, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.10.2022

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32A

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). Page 20 of 25 Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Assessment year 2018-19 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not invol…

THED CIT ,CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL vs. M/S DILIP BUILDCON LTD, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 290/IND/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

SHRI DILIP BUILDCON LTD,BHOPAL vs. DCIT CENTRAL -1, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 197/IND/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL vs. DILIP BUILDCON LTD., BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 882/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL vs. DILIP BUILDCON LTD., BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 881/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

DILIP BUILDCON LTD.,BHOPAL vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 820/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

DILIP BUILDCON LTD.,BHOPAL vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 819/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL vs. DILIP BUILDCON LIMITED, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 816/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

DILIP BUILDCON LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 782/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…as has been categorically held by the hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned standing counsel would also rely on the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Minocha Brothers P. Ltd. [1986] 60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 722 (Delhi). 8. At the outset, we are called upon to answer the question of law arising & from the majority decision; whether the making of RMC can be termed to be manufacture and it qualifies as a thing or article. Both the Tribunal Members, who found that the product of RMC does not involve a manufacture, relied on N. C. Budharaja and Co. We have…

M/S TITANOR COMPONENTS LTD vs. CIT & ANR

ITA - 24 / 1999HC Delhi04 Feb 2011
For Appellant: Mr.C.S. Jain and Mr. G. Tushar Rao, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate
Section 260ASection 80Section 80I

…this purpose they had to be 2011:DHC:692-DB dispatched under the agreement with UHDE by the assessee to one Alpha. The learned counsel in support of her contentions relied upon the judgment in the case of Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (1998) 232 ITR 722. 10. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and orders of the authorities below, including the material placed before us. 10.1 On consideration of the material, in our view the following facts have emerged : (i) the assessee had applied for a licence to set up an industry to manufacture coated titani…

60 ITR 134 (Delhi) and Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (232 ITR 722) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax