Asprin Wall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT 2001 (251) ITR 323

308 ITR 222High Court2009#17608 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 344,197 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Judgments citing Asprin Wall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT 2001 (251) ITR 323

Rakesh Kumar, Patna vs. DCIT, Circle-4, Patna

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13

ITA 86/PAT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos.85 & 86/Pat/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80I

…cisions for the proposition that manufacturing cannot be given narrow meaning and even assembling is also manufacturing, and the same are as under: i) Indian Cine Agencies 308 IYT 98 (SC), ii) Vijay Ship Breaking 314 ITR 309 SC, iii) Sri Mahesh Chandra Sharma 308 ITR 222 (PH), iv) Perfect liners 142 ITR 654 (Madras), v) Fateh Granite P Ltd. 314 ITR 32 (Bom), vi)Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. 355 ITR 14 (Delhi) and vii)Jeevan Diesel & Electricals Ltd Calcutta ITAT 7. He also submitted that it has also been consistently held that if a deduction has been granted for the initial year then unless there is a change…

Rakesh Kumar, Patna vs. DCIT, Circle-4, Patna

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13

ITA 85/PAT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos.85 & 86/Pat/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80I

…cisions for the proposition that manufacturing cannot be given narrow meaning and even assembling is also manufacturing, and the same are as under: i) Indian Cine Agencies 308 IYT 98 (SC), ii) Vijay Ship Breaking 314 ITR 309 SC, iii) Sri Mahesh Chandra Sharma 308 ITR 222 (PH), iv) Perfect liners 142 ITR 654 (Madras), v) Fateh Granite P Ltd. 314 ITR 32 (Bom), vi)Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. 355 ITR 14 (Delhi) and vii)Jeevan Diesel & Electricals Ltd Calcutta ITAT 7. He also submitted that it has also been consistently held that if a deduction has been granted for the initial year then unless there is a change…

M/S Asha Technologies, Kala Amb vs. ITO, Sirmour

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 61/CHANDI/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

…pheld by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2002 (255) ITR 178. v) Indian Hotel Co. Ltd. Vs. ITO 2000 (245) ITR 538 vi) CIT Vs. Gem India Manufacturing Co. 2001 (249) ITR 307 vii) Asprin Wall & Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 2001 (251) ITR 323 viii) CIT Vs. Shri Mahesh Chnder Sharma 308 ITR 222 (2009) P&H ix) Computer Graphics case of Apex Court x) Gramphone Co. (India) ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs (2000) 1 SCC 549 xi) UOI Vs. DCM (1963) AIR 1963 SC 791 xii) Dy. Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law) Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. M/s P10 Food Packers (1980) 46 STC 63, AIR 1980 SC 1227. xiii) Empire Industries Ltd. Vs. UOI (1986) 162 ITR 846 xi…

M/S Asha Technologies, Sirmour vs. Addl. CIT, Solan

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 388/CHANDI/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

…pheld by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2002 (255) ITR 178. v) Indian Hotel Co. Ltd. Vs. ITO 2000 (245) ITR 538 vi) CIT Vs. Gem India Manufacturing Co. 2001 (249) ITR 307 vii) Asprin Wall & Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 2001 (251) ITR 323 viii) CIT Vs. Shri Mahesh Chnder Sharma 308 ITR 222 (2009) P&H ix) Computer Graphics case of Apex Court x) Gramphone Co. (India) ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs (2000) 1 SCC 549 xi) UOI Vs. DCM (1963) AIR 1963 SC 791 xii) Dy. Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law) Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. M/s P10 Food Packers (1980) 46 STC 63, AIR 1980 SC 1227. xiii) Empire Industries Ltd. Vs. UOI (1986) 162 ITR 846 xi…

ITO 20(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Kumar Auto Sales, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 6652/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri. Morya PratapFor Respondent: Shri. Nitesh Joshi & Vipul K. Mody
Section 143(2)Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2010-11 The ITO 20(1)(4), M/s. Kumar Auto Sales, Room No. 608, 6th Floor, 1004, Kanchanganga, Piramal Chamber, Parel, 9/10 Manish Nagar, Mumbai- 400012. Vs. J.P.Road, 4 Bunglow, Andheri(W), Mumbai- 400053. PAN:-AAHFK2427N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri. Morya Pratap Respondent by : Shri. Nitesh Joshi & Vipul K. Mody Date of Hearing: 30/05/2016 Date of Pronouncement: 31/05/2016 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against…

Asprin Wall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT 2001 (251) ITR 323 (308 ITR 222) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax