ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT

343 ITR 89Supreme Court of India2012#703 most cited

What is ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

For calculation of deduction under Section 80HHC, if total interest is netted off after adjusting interest paid and received, the 90% reduction specified in Explanation (baa) is not applicable.

144

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ACG Associated Capsules · Section 80HHC · Explanation (baa) · 90% reduction · interest income · netting off interest · profits of business · deduction calculation · gross interest · net interest · 343 ITR 89

Also reported as

247 CTR 372

Sections most often in play

Section 115JASection 80HHCSection 80IBSection 143(3)Section 250Section 30Section 37(1)Section 44D
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 80hsection 80hhcsection 80hhdeduction under section 80iasection 80iaeligible businesssection 80isection 30profits and gains of business or professionbook profitssection 115jrevenue expenditure

Judgments citing ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, Cir-47, Kolkata vs. M/S Shree Ram Saw Mill, Howrah

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 374/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 80I

…o be reduced in terms of cl. (baa) of Explanation to s. 80HHC is the net interest, i.e. gross interest less expenditure incurred for the purpose of earning such interest." The judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court has been approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 343 ITR 89(SC). Under the scheme of the Act, the principle of law laid down in the above case is equally applicable to the facts in the appellant's case in respect of deduction under sec. 80lB of the Act. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and the legal position emerging from the foregoing discussion, I am of the view that i…

Goodricke Group Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-4(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 309/KOL/2015[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2018AY 2002-2003

Bench: "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 10Section 33A

…e Act on sale of DEPB license. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) while agreeing with the view of the AO reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of i) Topman Exports Vs. CIT 343 ITR 49 and (ii) ACG Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 343 ITR 89 and confirmed the rejection of assessee’s claim of deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act on sale of DEPB license. Aggrieved, assessee is before us. 15. We have heard rival submissions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We note that assessee’s claim that deduction u/s. 80HHC should be computed before the application of Rule 8, is…

Genom Biotech Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC -40, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 4656/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…ermined in this proceeding, as “profits of business” might change as per decision rendered by Tribunal. He also submitted that certain issues have since been decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Topman Exports (342 ITR 49), ACG Associated capsules (343 ITR 89) and other relevant decisions in the context of deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act. The Ld D.R also did not object to the same. Accordingly we direct the AO to examine the claim of the assessee. 109. The next issue urged by the assessee in AY 2004-05 relates to the disallowance of purchases made from Brahma Drugs P Ltd. During the year relevant to AY…

Opera Clothing, Mumbai vs. ACIT 18(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 917/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 154Section 80HSection 80I

…alternative pleas. The rectification petition filed by the assessee before Ld CIT(A) was also rejected. Hence the assessee has filed these appeals. 4. The Ld A.R submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of ACG Associated Capsules P Ltd (343 ITR 89) that the net income should be considered for computing “profits of business”. He submitted that the same ratio should be applied to the instant case also. He submitted that the assessee has paid excise duty on its purchases and in respect of purchases made from non-excisable units, the duty should be deemed to have been paid. He submitted that th…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Amricon Agrovat Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2300/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon'Ble Sri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Central Circle-2(1) -Vs- M/S. Amricon Agrovat (P).Ltd., Kolkata Kolkata (Pan Aadca 1610 Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant: Shri.S.Dasgupta Addl.Cit Dr For The Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, Fca Date Of Hearing : 15.2.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.03.2018. Order Per Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 27.9.2016 Of Cit(A)-20, Kolkata, Relating To Ay 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue In This Reads As Follows: “(I) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Accepting That The Term 'Manufacture' Occurring In The Context Of Section 80-Ib Does Not Necessarily Require That The End Product Of The Manufacturing Process Is To Be Completely Different From The Ingredients, As Regards Its Chemical Composition, Integral Structure Or Its Use. (Ii) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Accepting That The Process Of Manufacturing Of Poultry Feeds Does Not Amount To Mere Mixing Together Of All Different Ingredients, Without Involving Any Change In The Chemical Composition Of The Ingredients. (Iii) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Accepting That The Process Of Preparation Of Poultry Feeds Amount To Production Of An Article Within The Meaning Of Section 80Ib. (Iv) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Entire Amount Of Rs.1,12,50,626/- Claimed As Deduction U/S 80-Ib.

For Appellant: Shri.S.Dasgupta Addl.CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA
Section 14ASection 80Section 801B(4)Section 80I

…AR along with different case laws on this issue. I have considered the Hon 'ble Supreme Court's decision in the Pandian Chemical's case (supra) and I have also considered the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd vs CIT (343 ITR 89. I think, even though the said decision was rendered in the context of provisions of section 80HHC, yet in my opinion the principle laid down in that decision has equal application in the assessee's case as well. I further find that on similar facts the ITAT, Kolkata in the case of DCIT vs BMW Industries Limit (TA No.2115/Kol/2007) dated 29th Febr…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Amrit Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2304/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 2304 & 2305/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Cc-2(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Amrit Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacca 5987 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Hangshing, CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 80I

…with different case laws on this issue. I have considered the Hon'ble Supreme Court’s decision in the Pandian Chemical’s case (supra) and I have also considered the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 343 ITR 89. I think even though the said decision was rendered in the context of provisions of section 80HHC, yet in my opinion the principle laid down in that decision has equal application in the assessee’s case as well. I further find that on similar facts the ITAT, Kolkata in the case of DCIT vs. BMW Industries Limited (I.T.A. No. 2115/Kol/2007) dated 29…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Hjyderabad vs. M/S. Suryalatha Spinning Mills Limited

ITTA/158/2006HC Telangana03 Jan 2018

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

For Appellant: Mr.B.Narasimha SarmaFor Respondent: Mr.Challa Gunaranjan
Section 37Section 7Section 80H

…on of law No.1, the learned Senior Standing Counsel submitted that the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee, based on the judgment of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of 1 (2012) 343 ITR 89 (SC) CVNR,J & TA, J I.T.T.A.Nos.157, 158&261 of 2006 Date: 03.01.2018 3 Income Tax Vs. Janakiram Mills Limited2 and that the view taken by the Madras High Court in the said case was reversed by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai Vs. Sri Mangayarkarasi Mills Private Limited3. In para 32 of the judgment…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Hyderabad vs. M/S Suryavanshi Spinning Mills Ltd, Sp Road, Secunderabad

ITTA/261/2006HC Telangana03 Jan 2018

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

For Appellant: Mr.B.Narasimha SarmaFor Respondent: Mr.Challa Gunaranjan
Section 37Section 7Section 80H

…on of law No.1, the learned Senior Standing Counsel submitted that the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee, based on the judgment of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of 1 (2012) 343 ITR 89 (SC) CVNR,J & TA, J I.T.T.A.Nos.157, 158&261 of 2006 Date: 03.01.2018 3 Income Tax Vs. Janakiram Mills Limited2 and that the view taken by the Madras High Court in the said case was reversed by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai Vs. Sri Mangayarkarasi Mills Private Limited3. In para 32 of the judgment…

Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs. M/S Maruti Udyog Ltd

ITA/976/2005HC Delhi07 Dec 2017

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 14ASection 43BSection 80H

…th April 2009. ITA No.976/2005 Page 5 of 5 5. Question (xi) is answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 343 ITR 89 (SC). 6. ITA No. 976 of 2005 is disposed of accordingly. S. MURALIDHAR, J. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. DECEMBER 07, 2017 Rm…

M/S. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 07.09.2017
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)

…shall not extend to the sale of power, which shall stand included in the total turnover. Before parting with this issue, we make it clear that the exclusion, in view of the decision by the Hon'ble Apex Court in ACG Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 343 ITR 89 (SC), relied upon by the assessee before us, is only qua the ‘income’ in relation to the receipts by way of sale of power, crane charges, testing charges, etc., i.e., after netting identifiable costs incurred in relation thereto. We decide accordingly. 6 ITA Nos. 1858 & 1980/Mds/2011 (AY 2004-05) Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd. 7. The fourt…

Quadron Business Park Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 36, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4857/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4857/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Quadron Business Part Ltd. Dy. Cit, C.C.36, Plot No.28, Midc, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, बनाम/ Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Hinjewadi, Phase-Ii, Pune, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaeca 9058 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Sharma/ Shri Dhruv Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhijit Patankar

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Sharma/For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 80Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “जी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4857/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/s. Quadron Business Part Ltd. Dy. CIT, C.C.36, Plot No.28, MIDC, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, बनाम/ Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Hinjewadi, Phase-II, Pune, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAECA 9058 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Pradeep Sharma/ Shri Dhruv Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Abhijit P…

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s Samrakshana Electricals Limited

Appeals are dismissed

ITTA/235/2003HC Telangana09 Aug 2017
Section 260ASection 80H

…____________ T. RAJANI, J. 9th August, 2017 cbs 1 (2007) 292 ITR 641 (SC) 2 (2012) 343 ITR 89 (SC) 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN  AND THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. RAJANI I.T.T.A.Nos.123 and 235 of 2003 (dismissed) 9th August, 2017 cbs 4…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Samrakshana Electicals Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITTA/123/2003HC Telangana09 Aug 2017
Section 260ASection 80H

…____________ T. RAJANI, J. 9th August, 2017 cbs 1 (2007) 292 ITR 641 (SC) 2 (2012) 343 ITR 89 (SC) 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN  AND THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. RAJANI I.T.T.A.Nos.123 and 235 of 2003 (dismissed) 9th August, 2017 cbs 4…

DCIT RG. 1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Hindustan Liver Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the AO stands dismissed

ITA 3857/MUM/2003[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 1996-1997

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Ram Lal Negiवष" / Assessment Years: 1996-97 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita/3857/Mum/2003,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit Range-1(1) M/S. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan 165/166, Backbay Reclamation Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 020. Pan/Gir.No:Aaach 1004 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) वष" / Assessment Years: 1996-97 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita/3070/Mum/2003,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. Dcit-Range1(1) Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 020. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri Alok Johri-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Nishan Thakkar/ Ms. Jasmin Amalradvala सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 02.06.2017 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम, 1961 क" धारा ( 1 ) 254 केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" क" धारा धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dated 10/02/2000,Of Cit(A)-I,Mumbai The Assessing Officer (Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed Cross Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.Assessee -Company,Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Personal Care Products & Chemicals,Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.11.1996,Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2.45 Crores .The Ao Completed The Assessment On 29/01/1999, U/S. 143(3) Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs. 3.89 Crores

For Appellant: Shri Nishan Thakkar/For Respondent: Shri Alok Johri-CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 80H

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,मुंबई ” जेजेजेजे“ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“J”Bench Mumbai नेगी,"याियक सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम "याियक सद"य सद"य राम लाल लाल नेगी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member वष" / Assessment Years: 1996-97 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA/3857/Mum/2003,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" DCIT Range-1(1) M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan 165/166, Backbay Reclamation Vs. Mumbai-400 0…

Hershey India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO stands dismissed

ITA 1409/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: S/Shri Alok Johari & Arju Goradia
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 80M

…and applied in reference to dividend and income by way of dividend which was used in various provisions of the Act.He referred to the cases of Distributor (Baroda)Private Ltd.(22 taxman 49),Cloth Traders P Limited(118 ITR 243),ACG Associates Capsules P Ltd. (343 ITR 89) and the provisions of section 80M of the Act along with the circular No. 5, dated 11/02/2014. He further argued that in section 10(34) of the Act it was income by way of dividend and not the receipt of dividend which was exempt. 2.3.Before us, the Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of the AO and stated that there was difference…

Tool Centre India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1117/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 80H

…nd hence order of CIT(A) may be quashed.” 5. The learned Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the claim of the assessee that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACG associated capsules Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 2012 343 ITR 89 (SC) wherein it is held that whether the 90% of net labour charges or gross labour charges which has been included in the profit and loss account of the business of the assessee as computed under the head of profit and gains of business or provision is to be deducted under clause (i) of explanation (baa) to section 80HHC of the Act for determining…

Tool Centre India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1116/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 80H

…nd hence order of CIT(A) may be quashed.” 5. The learned Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the claim of the assessee that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACG associated capsules Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 2012 343 ITR 89 (SC) wherein it is held that whether the 90% of net labour charges or gross labour charges which has been included in the profit and loss account of the business of the assessee as computed under the head of profit and gains of business or provision is to be deducted under clause (i) of explanation (baa) to section 80HHC of the Act for determining…

Milan Laboratories (India), Thane vs. ACIT Cir 1, Thane

ITA 863/MUM/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2017AY 2003-2004
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 254(1)Section 263Section 28Section 3Section 80H

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “बी मुंबई बी बी” ” ” ” खंडपीठ बी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“B”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अमरजीत "सह, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./863/Mum/2009,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Milan Laboratories (India) CIT-(LTU) 29th Floor, Center No.1, World Trade A-5, Megh Malhar, Gavand Path, Vs. Naupada, Thane-400 602 Centre, Cuffe Parade PAN:AAFFM 0536 L Mumbai-400 005. (अपी…

The Dy CIT Cir.1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aegis Logistics Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed

ITA 8372/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2017AY 1999-2000

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं./Ita/7825/Mum/2004,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 आयकर अपील सं./Ita/6905/Mum/2006 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Aegis Logistics Limited Acit, Circle-1(1) 403, Peninsula Chambers, Morarjee Mills Mumbai. Compound,G.K. Marg, Lower Parel(W) Vs. Mumbai-400 013. Pan:Aaaca 3302 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./8372/Mum/2004 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Acit, Circle-1(1) Vs. Aegis Logistics Limited Mumbai. Mumbai-400013 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri S.K. Mishra-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti Patel सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:10/03/2017 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 16.6.2004 Of The Cit(A)-I,Mumbai The Assessee & The Assessing Officer(Ao)Have Filed Cross Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.The Assessee Has Also Filed Against The Penalty Imposed U/S.271(1)(C) For The Year Under Appeal.We Will Be Deciding All The Appeals By Single Common Order.Assessee-Company,Engaged In Business Of Manufacturing Of Chemicals,Filed Its Return Of Income,On 31.12.1999,Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5.97Crores.The Ao Completed Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 28.3.2002 Determin -Ing Its Income At Rs.13.93Crores. During The Course Of Hearing Before Us The Authorised Representative (Ar) Stated That The Assessee Was Not Interested In Pursuing Grounds No1.A, 1.C, 1.D & 1.E. Hence,Same Stand Dismissed, As Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Mishra-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…assessee for claiming deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act,that the AO had FAA had wrongly excluded or included certain items for deduction purposes.He relied upon the cases of ACG 7825/M/14;6905/M/06&8372/M/04- Aegis Logistics Ltd. Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd.(343 ITR 89)and Punjab Stainless steel Industries Ltd.(364 ITR 144).The DR supported the order of the FAA. 6.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that there are three issues in the appeal filed by the assessee i.e.netting of interest income, treatment to be given to dividend income and sale of scrap.In our opinion,…

M/S. Aegis Logistics Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir. 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed

ITA 7825/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2017AY 1999-2000

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं./Ita/7825/Mum/2004,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 आयकर अपील सं./Ita/6905/Mum/2006 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Aegis Logistics Limited Acit, Circle-1(1) 403, Peninsula Chambers, Morarjee Mills Mumbai. Compound,G.K. Marg, Lower Parel(W) Vs. Mumbai-400 013. Pan:Aaaca 3302 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./8372/Mum/2004 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Acit, Circle-1(1) Vs. Aegis Logistics Limited Mumbai. Mumbai-400013 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri S.K. Mishra-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti Patel सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:10/03/2017 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 16.6.2004 Of The Cit(A)-I,Mumbai The Assessee & The Assessing Officer(Ao)Have Filed Cross Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.The Assessee Has Also Filed Against The Penalty Imposed U/S.271(1)(C) For The Year Under Appeal.We Will Be Deciding All The Appeals By Single Common Order.Assessee-Company,Engaged In Business Of Manufacturing Of Chemicals,Filed Its Return Of Income,On 31.12.1999,Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5.97Crores.The Ao Completed Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 28.3.2002 Determin -Ing Its Income At Rs.13.93Crores. During The Course Of Hearing Before Us The Authorised Representative (Ar) Stated That The Assessee Was Not Interested In Pursuing Grounds No1.A, 1.C, 1.D & 1.E. Hence,Same Stand Dismissed, As Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Mishra-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…assessee for claiming deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act,that the AO had FAA had wrongly excluded or included certain items for deduction purposes.He relied upon the cases of ACG 7825/M/14;6905/M/06&8372/M/04- Aegis Logistics Ltd. Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd.(343 ITR 89)and Punjab Stainless steel Industries Ltd.(364 ITR 144).The DR supported the order of the FAA. 6.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that there are three issues in the appeal filed by the assessee i.e.netting of interest income, treatment to be given to dividend income and sale of scrap.In our opinion,…