ACIT v. Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd.

60 SOT 53Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#16009 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2017.

Judgments citing ACIT v. Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd.

Control Techniques India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 226/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Respondent: Shri. Ashish Tripathi, IRS, JCIT
Section 36(1)Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 226/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2011-2012 M/s. Control Techniques India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of P. Ltd, Income Tax, 117B, Developed Plots Estate, Corporate Circle 1(2) Perungudi, Chennai. Chennai 600 096. [PAN AAACC 1343B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. K.B.Muralidharan, C.A. अपीलाथ" क…

D.C.I.T., Circle-4, Kolkata vs. M/S. Rossell India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2774/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2009-10 Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata V/S. M/S Rossell India Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee 21/1A/3, Darga Road, Square, Kolkata-69 Jindal Towers, Block B, 4Th Floor, Park Circus, Kolkta-700 017 [Pan Noaabcr 3736 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…he decisions of the Kolkata ITAT in the case of ACIT vs. Champion Commercial Co. Ltd. (2013) 152 TTJ 241 (Kol), DCT vs. REI Agro Ltd. (2013) 144 ITD 141 (Kol) and the decision of the Chennai ITAT in the case of ACIT vs. Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd. (2013) 60 SOT 53 (Chennai). vi) Without prejudice to above, in case any interest expenditure is at all required to be disallowed, the same has to be netted off against the interest income and only the difference, if any, can be considered for disallowance of proportionate interest cost. [Rs.1,78,79,108/- (i.e. ITA No.2774/Kol/2013 A.Y 2009-10 DCIT Cir-4, Kol Vs. M…

DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Steel Processing & Distribution Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 379/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…se it is only then that common interest expenses, which are to be allocated as indirectly relatable to taxable income and tax exempt income, can be computed." The Hon'ble Chennai Tribunal has also in the case of ACIT vs Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd [2013] 60 SOT 53 (Chennai Trib) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal in the case of Champion Commercial Co. Ltd (mentioned supra) and held that interest on loan sanctioned for business projects do not form part of calculation of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Reliance is further placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal in the ca…

Tata Steel Processing and Distribution Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 303/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…se it is only then that common interest expenses, which are to be allocated as indirectly relatable to taxable income and tax exempt income, can be computed." The Hon'ble Chennai Tribunal has also in the case of ACIT vs Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd [2013] 60 SOT 53 (Chennai Trib) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal in the case of Champion Commercial Co. Ltd (mentioned supra) and held that interest on loan sanctioned for business projects do not form part of calculation of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Reliance is further placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal in the ca…

DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Ryerson Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1124/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…se it is only then that common interest expenses, which are to be allocated as indirectly relatable to taxable income and tax exempt income, can be computed." The Hon'ble Chennai Tribunal has also in the case of ACIT vs Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd [2013] 60 SOT 53 (Chennai Trib) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal in the case of Champion Commercial Co. Ltd (mentioned supra) and held that interest on loan sanctioned for business projects do not form part of calculation of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Reliance is further placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal in the ca…

G.Shanmuganathan, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1130/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1130/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri. J.C. Jacob, Retd. DCIT and Shri Mammen Mathews, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 54

…he first claim of the assessee was that the FMV of the land as on 01.04.1981 is "125/- per sq.ft as against "10/- per sq.ft adopted by the Assessing Officer. The Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Best and Crompton Engineering Ltd. (2013) (60 SOT 53) (Chennai) has held that the FMV of the land in the area of Ambattur Industrial Estate, as on 01.04.1981, could be "50/- per sq.ft. The Amnbattur Industrial area is less developed compared to Anna Nagar (west), where the assessee’s property was located. Hence, the FMV of :- 4 -: the assessee’s property (land portion only) will not be below "50/…

ACIT v. Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd. (60 SOT 53) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax