90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd.

279 ITR 331Supreme Court of India2015#609 most cited
162

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,444 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employee contributions · welfare funds · provident fund · ESI · due date for deposit · deduction of employee contributions · Explanation 2 · retrospective amendment · clarificatory amendment

Issues it is cited on

section 158besection 113section 92fclarificatory amendmentretrospective amendmentsection 158bbsection 158bsection 158section 36(1)(va)section 43bsection 132asection 145

Judgments citing 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd.

Suresh Productions Entertainment LLP, Chennai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 134/CHNY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am S.

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ra 7.7, and the same are as under: 1. CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 185 Taxman 416/319 ITR 306 (SC) 2. Aimil Ltd. (supra) 3. CIT v. Nispo Polyfabriks [2013] 350 ITR 327/213 Taxman 376/30 taxmann.com 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. [2015] 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar); 6. CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 34 taxmann.com 20/215 Taxman 597 (Kar.); 8. CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 (R…

Pragati Fashions P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dycti (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 569/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalepragati Fashions P Ltd., Vs. Dycti (Cpc) F.P.No. 455, Shree 1 St Floor, Prestige Sadguru Heights, Alpha, Bhavani Shankar Road, Beratenagrahara, Dadar (W) Hosur Road, Uttahalli Mumbai-400028. Hobli,Bangalore- 560100 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp1730H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Girish Dave.Sr.Counsel Respondent By : Shri. S.G. Menon.Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.02.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Shri. Girish Dave.Sr.CounselFor Respondent: Shri. S.G. Menon.Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Pragati Fashions P Ltd., Vs. DYCTI (CPC) F.P.No. 455, Shree 1 st Floor, Prestige Sadguru Heights, Alpha, Bhavani Shankar Road, Beratenagrahara, Dadar (W) Hosur Road, Uttahalli Mumbai-400028. Hobli,Bangalore- 560100 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCP1730H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri. Girish Dave.Sr.Counsel Respondent by : Shri. S.G. Menon.Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement 21.02.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GAD…

Franch Express Courier Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. The CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 523/CHNY/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.523/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Franch Express Courier Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Director Of No. 199, Hariyan Street, C-Pallavaram, Vs. Income Tax, Cpc, Chennai 600 043. Bengaluru 560 500. [Pan:Aadcf3624P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Vandana Vyas, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 31.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 28.09.2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2019-20 On 30.10.2019 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹.39,17,200/-. The Cpc, Bengaluru Has Completed The 2

For Appellant: Ms. Vandana Vyas, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

…and the same are as under: 1. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra) 2. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508/188 Taxman 265 (Delhi); 3. CIT v. NispoPolyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 327/213 Taxman 376/30 taxmann.com 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries ltd. [2015] 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); 6. CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. V. CIT [2013] 215 Taxman 597/34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar.); 8. CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Shakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 217 Taxman 64/35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla E…

Transsys Solutions Pvt Ltd, Kodambakkam vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 489/CHNY/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.489/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Transsys Solutions Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Director Of Plot. Super A 16-17, Rr Towers, Tvk Vs. Income Tax, Industrial Estate, Guindy, Cpc, Bengaluru 560 500. Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aadct4603N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Pawan Bohra, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 21.09.2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2019-20 On 25.10.2019. The Cpc, Bengaluru Has Completed The Assessment Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Bohra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

…. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra) 2. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508/188 Taxman 265 (Delhi); 16 I.T.A. No. 489/Chny/21 3. CIT v. NispoPolyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 327/213 Taxman 376/30 taxmann.com 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries ltd. [2015] 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); 6. CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. V. CIT [2013] 215 Taxman 597/34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar.); 8. CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Shakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 217 Taxman 64/35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla E…

Day N Day Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 425/CHNY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 424 & 425/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri H. Surendar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Addl.CIT
Section 113Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and the same are as under: 1. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra) 2. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508/188 Taxman 265 (Delhi); 3. CIT v. NispoPolyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 327/213 Taxman 376/30 taxmann.com 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries ltd. [2015] 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); 6. CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. V. CIT [2013] 215 Taxman 597/34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar.); 8. CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Shakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 217 Taxman 64/35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla E…

Day N Day Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC - 1(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 424/CHNY/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 424 & 425/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri H. Surendar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Addl.CIT
Section 113Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and the same are as under: 1. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra) 2. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508/188 Taxman 265 (Delhi); 3. CIT v. NispoPolyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 327/213 Taxman 376/30 taxmann.com 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries ltd. [2015] 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); 6. CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. V. CIT [2013] 215 Taxman 597/34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar.); 8. CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Shakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 217 Taxman 64/35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla E…

Adyar Ananda Bhavan Sweets India P Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 403/CHNY/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 402 & 403/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/S. Adyar Ananda Bhavan Vs The Acit, Sweets India P Ltd., Central Cirlce - 3(4), No.9, Shastri Nagar, Chennai – 34. M.G. Road, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaica 3787F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओ रसे/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate & Shri Arjunraj, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Durgesh Sumrott, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.12.2021

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Durgesh Sumrott, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and the same are as under: 1. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra) 2. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508/188 Taxman 265 (Delhi); 3. CIT v. NispoPolyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 327/213 Taxman 376/30 taxmann.com 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries ltd. [2015] 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); 6. CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. V. CIT [2013] 215 Taxman 597/34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar.); 8. CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Shakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 217 Taxman 64/35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla E…

Adyar Ananda Bhavan Sweets India P Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 402/CHNY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 402 & 403/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/S. Adyar Ananda Bhavan Vs The Acit, Sweets India P Ltd., Central Cirlce - 3(4), No.9, Shastri Nagar, Chennai – 34. M.G. Road, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaica 3787F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओ रसे/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate & Shri Arjunraj, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Durgesh Sumrott, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.12.2021

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Durgesh Sumrott, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and the same are as under: 1. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra) 2. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 508/188 Taxman 265 (Delhi); 3. CIT v. NispoPolyfabriks Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 327/213 Taxman 376/30 taxmann.com 90 (HP); 4. CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries ltd. [2015] 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.); 6. CIT v. Pamwi Tissues Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. V. CIT [2013] 215 Taxman 597/34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar.); 8. CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Shakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 217 Taxman 64/35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla E…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4642/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…Ltd. v. CCE: [1990] 183 ITR 577 (SC)  Ujagar Prints vs. Union of India: 179 ITR 317, 341 (SC)  N.C. Budhiraja: 204 ITR 412 (SC)  Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. V. CIT: 251 ITR 323 (SC)  CST vs. Jagannnath Cotton Company: 99 STC 83, 86 (SC)  CIT vs. Sesa Goa Ltd.: 279 ITR 331 (SC)  India Cine Agency v. CIT: 308 ITR 98 (SC)  ITO v. Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd.: 320 ITR 79 (SC)  Ship Scrap Traders v. CIT: 251 ITR 806 (Bom)  Orient Longman Ltd V. ITO: 130 ITR 477 (Del.)  CIT V. Ajay Printery (P) Ltd: 58 ITR 811 (Guj.) Applying the aforesaid principle in the assessee’s case, the Ld. AR submitted that the asses…

Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT-Ltu Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4454/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…Ltd. v. CCE: [1990] 183 ITR 577 (SC)  Ujagar Prints vs. Union of India: 179 ITR 317, 341 (SC)  N.C. Budhiraja: 204 ITR 412 (SC)  Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. V. CIT: 251 ITR 323 (SC)  CST vs. Jagannnath Cotton Company: 99 STC 83, 86 (SC)  CIT vs. Sesa Goa Ltd.: 279 ITR 331 (SC)  India Cine Agency v. CIT: 308 ITR 98 (SC)  ITO v. Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd.: 320 ITR 79 (SC)  Ship Scrap Traders v. CIT: 251 ITR 806 (Bom)  Orient Longman Ltd V. ITO: 130 ITR 477 (Del.)  CIT V. Ajay Printery (P) Ltd: 58 ITR 811 (Guj.) Applying the aforesaid principle in the assessee’s case, the Ld. AR submitted that the asses…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Global Resources Ltd(Eaelier Known As Gupta Coalfields & Washheries Ltd), Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 485/NAG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Global Resources Ltd(Eaelier Known As Gupta Coalfields & Washheries Ltd), Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 484/NAG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Global Resources Ltd(Eaelier Known As Gupta Coalfields & Washheries Ltd), Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 483/NAG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Global Resources Ltd(Eaelier Known As Gupta Coalfields 7 Washheries Ltd), Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 482/NAG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 481/NAG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 480/NAG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 479/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 478/NAG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 477/NAG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…

Asstt.C, I, .T, Central Cir, -2(3), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coalfields & Washeries Ltd., Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 429/NAG/2014[2005-06]Status: FixedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…STC 188 (SC) and in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead r…