Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT

196 ITR 188Supreme Court of India1992#272 most cited

What is Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Provisions in taxing statutes that grant incentives, concessions, or exemptions for promoting economic growth and industrialization must be interpreted liberally and purposively. Any restrictions placed on such provisions should also be construed reasonably to advance their objective, not frustrate it.

289

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2004 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Bajaj Tempo v. CIT · liberal interpretation · incentive provisions · economic growth · Section 32(1)(iia) · additional depreciation · Section 80IA · Section 80HHC · deduction provisions · tax exemptions · purposive construction

Also reported as

62 Taxmann 4803 SCC 78

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 80IASection 143(1)Section 80HHCSection 139(1)Section 80IBSection 10BSection 263

Issues it is cited on

section 32(1)(iia)section 80hhsection 80ia(4)section 80hhcdeduction under section 80iainfrastructure facilitydeduction u/s 80iatax benefitadditional depreciationsection 80iasection 80asection 80i

Judgments citing Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 377/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…wing decisions: Maharajah of Pithapuram vs. CIT (13 ITR 221) (PC); Karim Tharuvi Tea Estate Ltd vs. State of Kerala (60 ITR 262) (SC) Reliance vs. CIT (120 ITR 921) (SC) Goslino Mario vs. CIT (241 ITR 314) (SC) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bajai Tempo’s case (196 ITR 188) held that the provision granting deduction, exemption or relief should be construed liberally and in favour of the assessee. The above test has also been laid down in the following case: CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct vs. UO Co-op Fed. (176 ITR 435, 441)(SC) Broach Soc. vs. CIT (177 ITR 418,422)(SC) In view of the foregoing…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…wing decisions: Maharajah of Pithapuram vs. CIT (13 ITR 221) (PC); Karim Tharuvi Tea Estate Ltd vs. State of Kerala (60 ITR 262) (SC) Reliance vs. CIT (120 ITR 921) (SC) Goslino Mario vs. CIT (241 ITR 314) (SC) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bajai Tempo’s case (196 ITR 188) held that the provision granting deduction, exemption or relief should be construed liberally and in favour of the assessee. The above test has also been laid down in the following case: CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct vs. UO Co-op Fed. (176 ITR 435, 441)(SC) Broach Soc. vs. CIT (177 ITR 418,422)(SC) In view of the foregoing…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 356/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…wing decisions: Maharajah of Pithapuram vs. CIT (13 ITR 221) (PC); Karim Tharuvi Tea Estate Ltd vs. State of Kerala (60 ITR 262) (SC) Reliance vs. CIT (120 ITR 921) (SC) Goslino Mario vs. CIT (241 ITR 314) (SC) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bajai Tempo’s case (196 ITR 188) held that the provision granting deduction, exemption or relief should be construed liberally and in favour of the assessee. The above test has also been laid down in the following case: CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct vs. UO Co-op Fed. (176 ITR 435, 441)(SC) Broach Soc. vs. CIT (177 ITR 418,422)(SC) In view of the foregoing…

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Hutchison Telecom East Limited, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…wing decisions: Maharajah of Pithapuram vs. CIT (13 ITR 221) (PC); Karim Tharuvi Tea Estate Ltd vs. State of Kerala (60 ITR 262) (SC) Reliance vs. CIT (120 ITR 921) (SC) Goslino Mario vs. CIT (241 ITR 314) (SC) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bajai Tempo’s case (196 ITR 188) held that the provision granting deduction, exemption or relief should be construed liberally and in favour of the assessee. The above test has also been laid down in the following case: CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct vs. UO Co-op Fed. (176 ITR 435, 441)(SC) Broach Soc. vs. CIT (177 ITR 418,422)(SC) In view of the foregoing…

M/S Marmon Food & Beverage Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-11(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1811/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Tata Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. M. Rajasekhar, Addl. CIT
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)

…re to be liberally interpreted so as to achieve the object for which the said Section has been enacted and he could not have denied the benefit expressly made available by introducing artificial conditions therein, as set out in Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT [19921 196 ITR 188 (SC) and CIT v Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd [1992] 196 ITR 149 (SC). 5. The Learned CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the levy of interest of Rs.6,43,906/- under Section 234B when the aforesaid disallowance is not legally sustainable. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel assessee invited my attention with regard to ground N…

M/S Marmon Food & Beverage Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-11(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1810/BANG/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Tata Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. M. Rajasekhar, Addl. CIT
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)

…re to be liberally interpreted so as to achieve the object for which the said Section has been enacted and he could not have denied the benefit expressly made available by introducing artificial conditions therein, as set out in Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT [19921 196 ITR 188 (SC) and CIT v Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd [1992] 196 ITR 149 (SC). 5. The Learned CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the levy of interest of Rs.6,43,906/- under Section 234B when the aforesaid disallowance is not legally sustainable. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel assessee invited my attention with regard to ground N…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 11 (1) Bangalore vs. M/S Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd

Appeals are disposed of in the same terms

C.A. No.-020854-020854 - 2017Supreme Court05 Dec 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL

Section 263Section 33BSection 80

…Tax Act, 1922. After recording a finding of fact that the assessee was a genuine new industrial undertaking, it was observed that a provision of a taxing statute granting incentive for promoting growth and development should be construed liberally. 1 (1992) 196 ITR 188 (SC) = (1992) 3 SCC 78 18 The judgment is distinguishable. Construing liberally does not mean ignoring conditions for exemption. The main issue considered in the said judgment was that though the undertaking was a genuine ‘new industrial undertaking’ which was the qualification for the exemption, a nominal part of the und…

Jsw Steel Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4086/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Saikja
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4062, 4063, 4064 & 4086/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2011-12) M/s. JSW Steel Ltd., v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JSW Centre, Central – 4, 6th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 PAN NO: AAACJ 4323 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Joshi Department by : Shri S.K. Saikja Date of Hearing : 11.09.2017 Date of pronouncement : 30.11.2017 O R D E R P…

Jsw Steel Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4064/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Saikja
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4062, 4063, 4064 & 4086/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2011-12) M/s. JSW Steel Ltd., v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JSW Centre, Central – 4, 6th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 PAN NO: AAACJ 4323 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Joshi Department by : Shri S.K. Saikja Date of Hearing : 11.09.2017 Date of pronouncement : 30.11.2017 O R D E R P…

Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4063/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Saikja
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4062, 4063, 4064 & 4086/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2011-12) M/s. JSW Steel Ltd., v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JSW Centre, Central – 4, 6th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 PAN NO: AAACJ 4323 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Joshi Department by : Shri S.K. Saikja Date of Hearing : 11.09.2017 Date of pronouncement : 30.11.2017 O R D E R P…

Jsw Stel Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4062/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Saikja
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4062, 4063, 4064 & 4086/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2011-12) M/s. JSW Steel Ltd., v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JSW Centre, Central – 4, 6th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 PAN NO: AAACJ 4323 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Joshi Department by : Shri S.K. Saikja Date of Hearing : 11.09.2017 Date of pronouncement : 30.11.2017 O R D E R P…

Satish P. Malhotra, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6877/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Shri Satish P. Malhotra Vs. Ito 16(1)(2), Mumbai 601, A Wing, Aurus Chambers Behind Mahindra Towers S.S.Amrutwar Marg Worli – 400 013 Pan/Gir No. Awqpm6356H Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 264Section 45Section 54Section 54F

…uisition of a new house within statutory period of 2 years. 10. As per our considered view Sec.54 is an incentive provisions and it should be interpreted and applied liberally as held by the honourable Supreme Court in the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. C.I.T. (196 ITR 188). The honourable Supreme Court also held in the case of C.I.T. Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (196 ITR 149) that the expression used in the taxing statutes would primarily be understood in the sense in which it is harmonious with the object of the statute to effectuate the legislative intention. 11. Furthermore Hon’ble Supreme Cour…

Income Tax Officer, Hubli vs. M/S Kvg Bank Employees Co-Operative Credit Co-Op Society Ltd, Dharwad

ITA 671/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Laliet Kumarincome-Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Hubballi. … Appellant Vs. M/S.Kvg Bank Employees Co-Operative Credit Co-Op Society Ltd., Shankar Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Dharwad. … Respondent Pan: Aaaak 7950 N

For Appellant: Shri M.K.Biju, JCIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Balram Rao, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…ursuant to declared policy of the Government. Therefore, such a provision has to be read liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee (See – Bajaj Tempo Limited, Bombay v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City-III, Bombay (1992) 3 Page 3 of 7 SCC 78; 196 ITR 188 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-763-SC-IT. It is also trite that such a provision has to be construed as to effectuate the object of the Legislature and not to defeat it (See – Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay & Ors. v. Mahindra and Mahindra Limited & Ors. (1983) 4 SCC 392; [1983] 144 ITR 225 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-988-SC- IT. Therefore, it hardly needs to be empha…

Ratan Plastic Industries, Mumbai vs. ACIT 24(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 213/MUM/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am M/S. Ratan Plastic Industries Vs. Acit 24(3) R.No.401B, 4Th Floor 215, Atrium A-001, Ground Floor, Next To Courtyard Mariott Piramal Chambers, Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug Mumbai – 400 093 Mumbai – 400 012 Pan/Gir No.Aaafr3886K Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 143(3)Section 45Section 45(2)Section 48Section 80HSection 80I

…k-in- Trade has been exported by the assessee and export realization in foreign exchange has come to India, the claim of the assessee on the profit earned on such export u/s. 80HHC deserves to be allowed. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd., 196 ITR 188 held that incentive provisions should be construed liberally. In the instant case, I found that what the assessee had sold is its Stock-in-Trade and not the assets which had been converted from his investment. As it is not a case of investment conversion and the present case being the saleable capacity of the fixed assets which the assessee had c…

Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Bagalkot vs. Shri Bapooji Pattin Souhard Sahakari Niyamit, Bagalkot

ITA 827/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Ramesh, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT) BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar G. Hegde, CA
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…t was done pursuant to declared policy of the Government. Therefore, such a provision has to be read liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee (See – Bajaj Tempo Limited, Bombay v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City-III, Bombay (1992) 3 SCC 78; 196 ITR 188 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-763-SC-IT. It is also trite that such a provision has to be construed as to effectuate the object of the Legislature and not to defeat it (See – Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay & Ors. v. Mahindra and Mahindra Limited & Ors. (1983) 4 SCC 392; [1983] 144 ITR 225 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-988- SC-IT. Therefore, it hardly needs to be empha…

Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2506/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/O Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, Of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci1797A Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, Cas Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2007- 08 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Ii, Dehradun & The Other Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 09.02.2012, 20.12.2011 & 30.11.2012 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Dehradun For The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively. 2. Since The Issue Involved Is Common In All These Appeals Which Were Heard Together So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra JainFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

…operation between employees and employer in production and/or distribution of goods and services. It was also stated that beneficiary provision are to be construed liberally. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs CIT (1992) 196 ITR 188 (SC) " Broach District Co-operative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society Ltd. Vs CIT (1989) 177 ITR 418 (SC) 25. The ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee is being assessed to tax in Dehradun, all payments with respect to Provident Fund, ESI, TDS were deposited in the State of Uttaranchal and all the technocrates even workin…

Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5856/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/O Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, Of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci1797A Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, Cas Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2007- 08 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Ii, Dehradun & The Other Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 09.02.2012, 20.12.2011 & 30.11.2012 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Dehradun For The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively. 2. Since The Issue Involved Is Common In All These Appeals Which Were Heard Together So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra JainFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

…operation between employees and employer in production and/or distribution of goods and services. It was also stated that beneficiary provision are to be construed liberally. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs CIT (1992) 196 ITR 188 (SC) " Broach District Co-operative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society Ltd. Vs CIT (1989) 177 ITR 418 (SC) 25. The ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee is being assessed to tax in Dehradun, all payments with respect to Provident Fund, ESI, TDS were deposited in the State of Uttaranchal and all the technocrates even workin…

Sanjeev Sinha, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1131/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1131/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri. Tarun GhiaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari
Section 143(3)Section 54

…atisfy their need for housing and even genuine and bonafide buyers will be denied the benefit as they are otherwise entitled to u/s 54. Reference can be drawn to the following observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 196 ITR 188/62 Taxman 480 : "The provision in a taxing statute granting incentives for promoting growth and development should be construed liberally; since the provision for promoting economic growth has to be interpreted liberally , restrictions on it too has to be construed so as to advance the objective of the provisions and not to frustrate it." I.T.A.…

ACIT, Cir-33, Kolkata vs. M/S Ashiana Amar Developers, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1307/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 80I

…C) 243, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held: “The contextual meaning has to be ascertained and given effect to. A provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be construed reasonably and in favour of the assessee”. 7.1 In the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd. vs CIT 196 ITR 188, Hon’ble Supreme Court once again held: “A provision in a taxing statute granting incentives for promoting growth and development should be construed liberally, and since a provision for promoting economic growth has to be interpreted liberally, the restriction on it too has to be construed so as to advance the objective of the provision and not…

Sri Akber Ayub, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for asst

ITA 944/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Jason P Boazsri Akber Ayub, No.04, Skyline Chalet, Dewan Madhavrao Road, Opp. Krishnarao Park, Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Bengaluru. . Respondent Pan - Abopa2599R. Appellant By : Shri P Dinesh, Advocate Respondent By : Shri M.K Biju, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri P Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K Biju, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 54E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH 'C' BEFORE SHRI VIJAYPAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sri Akber Ayub, No.04, Skyline Chalet, Dewan Madhavrao Road, Opp. Krishnarao Park, Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. The Income-tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Bengaluru. . Respondent PAN - ABOPA2599R. Appellant by : Shri P Dinesh, Advocate Respondent by : Shri M.K Biju, JCIT Date of Hearing : 11-9-2017 Date of Pronouncement : -9-2017 O R D E R PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax…