Baidya Nath Plastic Industries (supra) and A.M. Shamsuddin v. UOI & Ors.

244 ITR 266High Court2000#13825 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2023.

Judgments citing Baidya Nath Plastic Industries (supra) and A.M. Shamsuddin v. UOI & Ors.

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(2), Pune vs. Dhariya Construction Pvt Ltd, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1937/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Pune23 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.1937/PUN./2017 Assessment Year 2010-2011 Dhariya Construction Pvt. The DCIT, Circle-1(2), Ltd., Plot No.43, Indu PMT Bldg., Swargate, vs., | Niwas, Shivaji Housing Shankarshet Road, Society, Shivaji Nagar, Pune — 411 037. Pune — 411 016. PAN AAECA9056B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue _:|CA Abhay Avachat For Assessee : | Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of Hearing : | 23.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : | 23.05.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J…

Boomi Bottling Gas, Chennai vs. Addl. CIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 268/CHNY/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.Ponraj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jt. CIT
Section 271Section 271ASection 271BSection 271CSection 271DSection 271ESection 271FSection 271GSection 272ASection 272B

…ttling Gas Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl. CIT relevant previous year, i.e., f.y. 2002-03, applicable only to ‘deposits’. The same signify a different concept from ‘loan’, as explained by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in A.M.Shamsudeen v. Union of India [2000] 244 ITR 266 (Mad), concurring with Baidyanath Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [1998] 230 ITR 522 (Del). In the present case, the amounts are deposited and withdrawn at will, i.e., as and when required. Deposit is specifically defined in s. 269T as a deposit of money which is repayable after notice or repayable after period. The demand deposit in the pres…

CIT vs. Jetlife India Ltd

ITA/1276/2011HC Delhi13 Dec 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 2Section 2(12)Section 260ASection 269TSection 271E

…98] 230 ITR 522 (Delhi) and it was held that the said provision before its amendment with effect from 1st June, 2002 would apply only in cases of deposits and not in cases of loans. Madras High Court in the case of A.M. Shamsudden Vs. Union of India [2000] 244 ITR 266 (Mad.) and Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Secure Meters Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 611 have taken a similar view. 10. In view of the aforesaid decisions, the Legislature by Finance Act had expanded the ambit and scope of Section 269T to cover repayment of loans. This amendment, however, is with effect from 1st ITA 1276/2011 & 1277/2011…

CIT vs. Jetlife India Ltd

ITA - 1277 / 2011HC Delhi13 Dec 2011
Section 2Section 2(12)Section 260ASection 269TSection 271E

…230 ITR 522 (Delhi) and it was held that the said provision before its amendment with effect from 1 St June, 2002 would apply only in cases of deposits and not in cases of loans. Madras High Court in the case of A.M. S/,amsudden Vs. Union of India [2000] 244 ITR 266. (Mad.) and Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Secure Meters Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 611 have taken a similar view. In view of the aforesaid decisions, the Legislature by Finance Act had expanded the ambit and scope of Section 269T to cover repayment of loans. This amendment, however, is with effect from 1st ITA 1276/20 11 & 1277/2011 Page 4 of…

CIT vs. Jetlife India Ltd

ITA - 1276 / 2011HC Delhi13 Dec 2011
Section 2Section 2(12)Section 260ASection 269TSection 271E

…98] 230 ITR 522 (Delhi) and it was held that the said provision before its amendment with effect from 1st June, 2002 would apply only in cases of deposits and not in cases of loans. Madras High Court in the case of A.M. Shamsudden Vs. Union of India [2000] 244 ITR 266 (Mad.) and Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Secure Meters Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 611 have taken a similar view. 10. In view of the aforesaid decisions, the Legislature by Finance Act had expanded the ambit and scope of Section 269T to cover repayment of loans. This amendment, however, is with effect from 1st 2011:DHC:6371-DB ITA 1276/2011 &…

Commissioner of Interest Tax vs. Visisth Chay Vyapar Ltd

ITA/689/2009HC Delhi30 Aug 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 2(7)Section 5

…osit from a mere loan.” 16. The aforesaid view was followed by this Court in CIT Vs. Vikramajit Singh (supra). The Madras High Court has taken the same as toed line following Baidya Nath Plastic Industries (supra) and A.M. Shamsuddin Vs. UOI & Ors. 244 ITR 266 (Mad.) 17. Once we find that monies given by the assessee to SWC did not fulfill the aforesaid criteria thereby bringing it within the expression ITA 689 OF 2009,712 OF 2009,765 OF 2009 Page 13 of 14 “loan”, the question of applicability of Section 2 (7) of the Interest Tax Act would not arise. 18. Section 2 (7)…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Visisth Chay Vypapar Ltd

ITA-689/2009HC Delhi30 Aug 2011
Section 2(7)Section 5

…osit from a mere loan.” 16. The aforesaid view was followed by this Court in CIT Vs. Vikramajit Singh (supra). The Madras High Court has taken the same as toed line following Baidya Nath Plastic Industries (supra) and A.M. Shamsuddin Vs. UOI & Ors. 244 ITR 266 (Mad.) 17. Once we find that monies given by the assessee to SWC did not fulfill the aforesaid criteria thereby bringing it within the expression 2011:DHC:4445-DB ITA 689 OF 2009,712 OF 2009,765 OF 2009 Page 13 of 14 “loan”, the question of applicability of Section 2 (7) of the Interest Tax Act would not arise. 18…

Baidya Nath Plastic Industries (supra) and A.M. Shamsuddin v. UOI & Ors. (244 ITR 266) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax