7.14 In CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd.

196 ITR 149Supreme Court of India1992#872 most cited

What is 7.14 In CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. authority for?

Incentive provisions in the Income-tax Act, particularly those granting deductions for new industrial undertakings, must be construed liberally to achieve their legislative purpose. This principle guides the interpretation of conditions such as what constitutes a 'new undertaking' versus a 'splitting up or reconstruction' of an existing business for claiming deductions.

120

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. · 196 ITR 149 · liberal construction · incentive provisions · new industrial undertaking deduction · Section 80IC · Section 80J · Section 80HH · splitting up reconstruction of business · tax benefit · benevolent provisions · Supreme Court 1992

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10(2A)Section 143(3A)Section 263Section 28(v)Section 40(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(3B)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(29ba)section 28(v)section 80jjsection 10(2a)section 40(b)section 80jsection 80hhcsection 80icsection 80hhtax benefitsection 80asection 80i

Judgments citing 7.14 In CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd.

M/S Marmon Food & Beverage Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-11(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1810/BANG/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Tata Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. M. Rajasekhar, Addl. CIT
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)

…ch the said Section has been enacted and he could not have denied the benefit expressly made available by introducing artificial conditions therein, as set out in Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT [19921 196 ITR 188 (SC) and CIT v Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd [1992] 196 ITR 149 (SC). 5. The Learned CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the levy of interest of Rs.6,43,906/- under Section 234B when the aforesaid disallowance is not legally sustainable. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel assessee invited my attention with regard to ground No. 2 through which he assailed the validity of the reopening of th…

Satish P. Malhotra, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6877/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Shri Satish P. Malhotra Vs. Ito 16(1)(2), Mumbai 601, A Wing, Aurus Chambers Behind Mahindra Towers S.S.Amrutwar Marg Worli – 400 013 Pan/Gir No. Awqpm6356H Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 264Section 45Section 54Section 54F

…ns and it should be interpreted and applied liberally as held by the honourable Supreme Court in the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. C.I.T. (196 ITR 188). The honourable Supreme Court also held in the case of C.I.T. Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (196 ITR 149) that the expression used in the taxing statutes would primarily be understood in the sense in which it is harmonious with the object of the statute to effectuate the legislative intention. 11. Furthermore Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sanjeev Lal 365 ITR 389 observed as under:- “Income-tax on the long-term Capital gain. The intention of the L…

Sh. Sanjay Dalmia, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result all the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3795/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri SS Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(b)

…Act, the question has not been decided on the basis of emotions or moral approach but on legal approach. iv) CIT Vs Koodathii Kallyatan 2008-TIQL-427-HC-MUM-IT The Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mill Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 196 ITR 149 has observed as follows: "Logic alone will not be determinative of a controversy arising from a taxing statute. Equally, common sense is a stranger and an incompatible partner to the Income-tax Act. It does not concern itself with the principles of morality or ethics. It is concerned with the very limited question as to whether the amount brought…

Sri Akber Ayub, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for asst

ITA 944/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Jason P Boazsri Akber Ayub, No.04, Skyline Chalet, Dewan Madhavrao Road, Opp. Krishnarao Park, Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Bengaluru. . Respondent Pan - Abopa2599R. Appellant By : Shri P Dinesh, Advocate Respondent By : Shri M.K Biju, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri P Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K Biju, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 54E

…isions of the Hon'ble Apex Court have laid down the proposition that provisions for deduction, exemption or relief are to be construed liberally in order to advance the objective and not to frustrate it. (i) CIT Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (196 ITR 149)(SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. ( 88 ITR 192) (iii) Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. CIT (196 ITR 188)(SC) Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the CBDT’s Circular No.3/2008, and the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court for interpreting statutes, we are of the considered view that it would be in the…

DCIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Ateev V Gala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1906/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2010-11 Dcit-17(2), Ateev V. Gala, R. No.217, 02Nd Floor, 575/A, The Orient Jame बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Jamshed Road, Vs. Mumbai-400012 Matunga Mumbai-400019 Pan No.Aalpg6039N (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

Section 10(2)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 56Section 56(2)Section 64(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ए, मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI "ी जोिग"दर "सह, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य, के सम" । Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member and Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member Assessment Year-2010-11 DCIT-17(2), Ateev V. Gala, R. No.217, 02nd Floor, 575/A, The Orient Jame बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Jamshed Road, Vs. Mumbai-400012 Matunga Mumbai-400019 PAN No.AALPG6039N (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Shri R.P. Meena CIT-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Hari Raheja सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing…

High Rise Construction, Nagpur vs. I.T.O. Ward 1(5), Nagpur

In the result this appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 285/NAG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 250Section 80I

…etent local authority for the purpose of issuing approval and completion certificate for claiming deduction u/s 80IB(10) of I.T. Act. Moreover, the respondent-assessee has also placed reliance on a decision of CIT vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 196 ITR 149 (SC) for legal proposition that the provisions for deductions and exemptions should be construed reasosnably and in favour of the assessee. In our considered opinion since all the issues in hand have been covered either by the orders of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case or by respected coordinate Benches, therefore, we find no fallacy in the vi…

Niamat Mahroof Virji, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1964/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1964/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Niamat Mahroof Virji, I.T.O. 17(3)(3), बनाम/ Unit 232, 2 Nd Floor, Piramal Chambers, V. Bussa Udyog Bhavan, Opp Parel P.O., T.J. Road, Mumbai. Sewree. Mumbai – 400 015. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aahpv1071H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Neil Philip
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50CSection 54E

…as been raised, that such provision should be interpreted liberally. For this legal proposition of liberal interpretation decisions cited are namely, Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT [1962] 196 ITR 188/62 Taxman 480 (SC), CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. [1962] 196 ITR 149/62 Taxman 471 (SC) and CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. [1973] 88 ITR 192 (SC). Even it has also been argued that the highest Revenue Authority, i.e., CBDT has also taken due cognizance of such incentive provisions, therefore, granted relaxation. Such as in CBDT Circular No.794 dated 9th of August, 2000; CBDT Circular No.359 dated 10th of May, 1983…

M/S. Avalon Business Associates, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 7030/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Ms.Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 14Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145

….T.A. No. 7030/Del/2014 assessment years beginning with the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the undertaking begins to manufacture or produce such items. 16. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. AA ERSS Exim Pvt.Ltd., reported in (1992) 196 ITR 149 has held as under; “It is settled law that the expression used in a taxing statute would ordinarily be understood in the sense in which it is harmonious with the object of the statute to effectuate the legislative animation. In Raja Jagadambika Pratap Narain Singh vs. CBDT 1975 CTR (SC) 206 : (1975) 100 ITR 698 (SC), this Court held that equity…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, cross objections of the

ITA 4847/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…er. 48. We may also point out that to support the case of the AO, the ld. CIT-DR has placed reliance on plethora of decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Anand Theatre [supra], CIT Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Mills 196 ITR 149 [SC] and decision of Hon’ble Vs. ACIT [2014] 52 Taxmann.com 21 [Delhi] to establish that golf course is not a plant and machinery and it is to be categorised as a building and on the other hand, the ld. AR has placed reliance on the case of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Karnataka Power Corpn. 247 ITR 268 [SC], Scien…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Landbase India Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, cross objections of the

ITA 3549/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…er. 48. We may also point out that to support the case of the AO, the ld. CIT-DR has placed reliance on plethora of decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Anand Theatre [supra], CIT Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Mills 196 ITR 149 [SC] and decision of Hon’ble Vs. ACIT [2014] 52 Taxmann.com 21 [Delhi] to establish that golf course is not a plant and machinery and it is to be categorised as a building and on the other hand, the ld. AR has placed reliance on the case of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Karnataka Power Corpn. 247 ITR 268 [SC], Scien…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Shri. Sandeep Abrol, Bangalore

In the result: The Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1322/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Apr 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George George Ki.T.(I.T) A. No.1322/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Sandeep Abrol, Tax, (Int. Taxation), Apartment No.31, 14, Circle 1(1), Bengaluru. Cornwall Block, Prestige Kinsington Garden, Bengaluru-560 013 Pan Azhpa 3903E Appellant Respondent.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: Shri R.E. Balasubramanyam, C.A
Section 54Section 54(1)Section 54E

…with using the words ‘in a financial year.’’ 7.2. Extensively quoting the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vikrant Tyres Ltd v. I ITO reported in 247 ITR 821 (SC) and also in the cases of (i) CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co. Ltd (196 ITR 149 – SC) and (ii) Bajaj Tempo Ltd v. CIT [196 ITR 188 (SC)], the earlier Bench of this Tribunal was of the view that – “9.8…………………………………………………………………………… Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the CBDT’s Circular No.3/2008 and the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court for interpreting statues, we of the c…

M/S. Intergarden (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1292/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijay Pal Raoi.T.A No.1292/Bang/2010 (Assessment Year : 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. Prakash Chand Yadav, Advocate & Shri. Suresh Balani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR & Shri. Manoj Kumar, Add. CIT
Section 10BSection 144CSection 234B

…ITA.1292/Bang/2010; IT(TP)A.887,963/Bang/2013 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'B', BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A No.1292/Bang/2010 (Assessment Year : 2006-07) I.T.A No.287/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/s. Intergarden (India) P. Ltd, No.68, Obalapura Village, Anngondanahalli Hobli, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore 560 067 .. Appellant PAN : AAACI7962H v. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -11(4), Bangalore .. Respondent I.T.A No.968/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) (By the Revenue) Assessee by…

Sunil Gavaskar, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) 3(1), Mumbai

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3970/MUM/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri D.V. LakhaniFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Waghmade
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 80RSection 8O

…ction or compelling circumstances of any particular case, make a benevolent and justice-oriented inference. Facts must be viewed in the social milieu of a country. 15.7. Further, the apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 196 ITR 149 (SC) has held with regard to the interpretation of statute granting deduction, exemption, or relief to the taxpayer that it is settled law that the expression used in the taxing statute would ordinarily be understood in the sense in which it is harmonious with the object of statute to effectuate the legislative intention. It is equally settled la…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. Sri Srinivasan Radhesh, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is dismissed

ITA 1151/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P. Dhivahar, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: Shri B.M. Manjunath, C.A
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 54E

…cisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court have laid down the proposition that provisions for deduction, exemption or relief are to be construed liberally in order to advance the objective and not to frustrate it. (i) CIT Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (196 ITR 149)(SC) 8 Shri Srinivasan Radhesh (ii) CIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. ( 88 ITR 192) (iii) Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. CIT (196 ITR 188)(SC) Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the CBDT’s Circular No.3/2008, and the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court for interpreting statutes, we are of the considered vi…

Smt. Neena Krishna Menon, Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 578/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Mar 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. Kotresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2009-10 Smt. Neena Krishna Menon, Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, C/o. V.M.G. Menon, Bangalore-IV, TF 101, “Benson Harmony”, Bangalore. 49/3, Benson Cross, “A” Road, Benson Town, Bangalore – 560 052. PAN: AHPPN 4835N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri K. Kotresh, C.A. Respondent by : Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II(DR) Date of hearing : 03.03.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 05.03.2015 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member Thi…

Commissioner of Income Tax – I

ITA/551/2013HC Delhi05 Feb 2015
Section 10B

…f the Act. Such narrowness and curtailment should not be accepted. Export of goods and things can take various forms and Section 10B accepts and admits such interpretation. 19. In CIT versus Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Company Limited, (1992) 196 ITR 149 (SC), it was held that an expression used in taxing statute should be ordinarily understood in the sense it harmonises with the object of the statute to effectuate the legislative intention. If the language is plain and unambiguous, one can look fairly at the language used and interpret it to give effect to the legislative intent. Neverthe…

CIT vs. Hotel Excelsior Ltd

ITA - 839 / 2011HC Delhi15 Jul 2011
Section 438

…ssary. The pommissioner, in our view, has correctly applied the principal laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Delhi Airport Service 255 ITR 90 and also the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. 196 ITR 149 and the decision of the Madras'High Court I CIT Vs. Solution Petro Chemicals Indus.iries Corporation Ltd, 233 ITR 391 to g'ive an extend and more meaningful definition bt tfre terr-n 'building'. We agree his view and decline to interfere on this aspect of the matter. Moreover it must be appreciated the revenue has adcepted the order of the CIT (A…

CIT vs. Hotel Excelsior Ltd

ITA - 838 / 2011HC Delhi15 Jul 2011
Section 43B

…ssary. The Commissioner, in our view, has correctly applied the principal laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Delhi Airport Service 255 ITR 90 and also the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. 196 ITR 149 and the decision of the Madras High Court I CIT Vs. Solution Petro Chemicals Industries Corporation Ltd. 233 ITR 391 to give an extend and more meaningful definition of the term 'building'. We agree his view and decline to interfere on this aspect of the matter. Moreover it must be appreciated the revenue has accepted the order of the CIT (A) for…

CIT vs. Hotel Excelsior Ltd

ITA - 840 / 2011HC Delhi15 Jul 2011
Section 438

…ary. The i)ommissioner, in our view, has correctly appliedtihe principal laid down by the jurisdictional High ilourt in the case of CIT Vs. Delhi Airport Service 255 ITR 90 and also the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. 196 ITR 149 and the decision of the wt-adras Higll Court I CIT Vs. Solution Petro Chemicals Industries Corporation Ltd. 233 ITR 391 to give an extend and more meaningful definition of the terrn 'building'. We agree his view and decline to interfere on this aspect of the matter. Moreover it must be appreciated tlre revenue has accepted the order of the CIT (A…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Front Line Securities Limited

Appeal is dismissed accordingly

ITA/1007/2008HC Delhi26 Aug 2010

Bench: The Assessing Officer As To Whether This Loss Was A Business Loss Or Speculative Loss. According To The Ao, The Case Of The Assessee Falls Within The Provisions Of Explanation To Section 73 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) & Treating The Said Loss To

Section 18Section 73

…decision of Hon‟ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Motor & General Sales Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 226 ITR 137 wherein financing of vehicles was held as business of money lending. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court reported in 196 ITR 149/156. 7. We have heard rival submissions and considered them carefully. After considering the relevant material and case laws and the details on which our attentions were drawn by the learned counsel, we find that assessee‟s case fails under exception clauses of Explanation to 73. We have seen amended clauses of the company and found tha…