Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. v. CIT

251 ITR 329Supreme Court of India2001#2168 most cited

What is Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Income earned during the construction phase of a project, which has a direct and inextricable nexus with the project's setting up, constitutes a capital receipt and reduces the project's cost, rather than being taxable as revenue income. This applies to incidental income like interest on funds (e.g., share capital, grants) temporarily parked before being utilized for the specific project.

53

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. v. CIT · 251 ITR 329 · SC · capital receipt · income during construction · project cost reduction · section 56 · income from other sources · capital expenditure · inextricable link to project · interest on project funds · set-up of project

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 2(24)Section 28Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35DDASection 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 23(5)construction peannual letting valueannual valuesection 22infrastructure facilityprofits and gains of business or professionsection 56income from other sourcesliable to taxsection 24capital expenditure

Judgments citing Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. v. CIT

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Ksk Wind Power Sankonahatti Athni Private Limied, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 34/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…e so, income received from the contractor undertaking the work of set up of the business of the assessee, has once again been made out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its later decision in the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT (2001) 251 ITR 329 (SC). In this judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the law that excluding interest derived by the assessee during the period prior to the commencement of business, other items of income such as hire charges for it equipment and recoveries from contractors on account of water and electricity charges shall be adjusted against the proj…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Ksk Wind Energy Halagali Benchi Private Limied, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 33/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…e so, income received from the contractor undertaking the work of set up of the business of the assessee, has once again been made out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its later decision in the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT (2001) 251 ITR 329 (SC). In this judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the law that excluding interest derived by the assessee during the period prior to the commencement of business, other items of income such as hire charges for it equipment and recoveries from contractors on account of water and electricity charges shall be adjusted against the proj…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. L & T Metro Rail (Hyderabad) Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1412/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs. L & T Metro Rail Circle-16(1), (Hyderabad) Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcl 8521 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ashik Shah Revenue By: Sri B. Sunil Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/01/2022 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am.:

For Appellant: Shri Ashik ShahFor Respondent: Sri B. Sunil Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…e so, income received from the contractor undertaking the work of set up of the business of the assessee, has once again been made out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its later decision in the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT (2001) 251 ITR 329 (SC). In this judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the law that excluding interest derived by the assessee during the period prior to the commencement of business, other items of income such as hire charges for it equipment and recoveries from contractors on account of water and electricity charges shall be adjusted against the proj…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd

In the result, the appeals stand dismissed

ITA/118/2015HC Karnataka23 Nov 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

Section 10(35)Section 260

…r) following the judgments in the case of KUIDFC [(2006) - 17 - 284 ITR 582], Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd., supra, as well as Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (2001) 251 ITR 329 (SC) and Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., reported in (1999) 236 ITR 315 (SC), has held thus:- “In the light of the judgments referred to above, we have examined the case on hand. It is clear that the assessee has received the grant of Rs.10 crores from the Government of Karnataka for a particular project i.e., for impro…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd

In the result, the appeals stand dismissed

ITA/117/2015HC Karnataka23 Nov 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

Section 10(35)Section 260

…r) following the judgments in the case of KUIDFC [(2006) - 17 - 284 ITR 582], Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd., supra, as well as Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (2001) 251 ITR 329 (SC) and Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., reported in (1999) 236 ITR 315 (SC), has held thus:- “In the light of the judgments referred to above, we have examined the case on hand. It is clear that the assessee has received the grant of Rs.10 crores from the Government of Karnataka for a particular project i.e., for impro…

Quadro Info Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-1(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 2617/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2021AY 2011-12
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80I

…lizers Ltd., [227 ITR 172] (SC), Bongaigaon Refinery 8s Petrochemicals Ltd., [251 ITR Fertilizers Ltd., [227 ITR 172] (SC), Bongaigaon Refinery 8s Petrochemicals Ltd., [251 ITR Fertilizers Ltd., [227 ITR 172] (SC), Bongaigaon Refinery 8s Petrochemicals Ltd., [251 ITR 329] (SC) and CIT Vs.-Autokast Ltd., [248 ITR 110] (SC) the order of the AO in disallowing Rs.3,85,596 Autokast Ltd., [248 ITR 110] (SC) the order of the AO in disallowing Rs.3,85,596 Autokast Ltd., [248 ITR 110] (SC) the order of the AO in disallowing Rs.3,85,596- of interest income earned on Fixed Deposits and adding back to the total income of the…

M/S. Ganpati Global Private Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward1(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 302/JPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a

…f : (i) Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC); (ii) CIT vs Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd 243 ITR 2 (SC); (iii) CIT vs Karnataka Power Corporation 247 ITR 268 (SC); (iv) BongaigaonRefinary And Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, [2001] 251 ITR 329 (SC); 6 M/s Ganpati Global (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (v) Indian Oil Panipat Power Consortium Ltd vs. ITO 315 ITR 255 (Delhi High Court); (vi) CIT vs Jaypee Dsc Ventures Ltd in ITA No. 357/2010 (Delhi High Court);and (vii) PCIT vs Facor Power Ltd (2016) 66 Taxmann.com (Delhi High Court), it has been categorically held that if the income is earned whether…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Karnataka Road Developemnt Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by revenue in ITA No

ITA 935/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. B. J. Shetty, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 43B

…ra), the Apex Court following the Judgment of Bokaro Steel Ltd's case (supra) has held that "interest receipts and hire charges from contractors are in the nature of capital receipts". 13. In the case of Bongaigaon Refinary & Petrochemicals Ltd., v. CIT[2001] 251 ITR 329/119 Taxman 488 the Apex Court considering the decision in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals Ltd.'s case (supra) and Bokaro Steel Ltd.'s case (supra) has held that in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd.'s case, the question related was with the interest earned by the Company during its formative period by investments while in Bokaro Steel Ltd.'…

M/S. Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 385/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.384&385/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Plot No.7622/4706, Press Chhaka Gajapati Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 Pan No. : Aahca 6638 E (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.09.2019, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee For A.Y.2013-2014 Are As Under :- 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Is Illegal, Arbitrary Contrary To Evidence On Record & Without Application Of Mind & For That Matter The Said Order Is Liable To Be Quashed And/Or Annulled. 2. That On The Facts Of Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Treating Interest On Fdr & Flexi Deposit Amounting To Rs. 1,08,02,969/- As Revenue Receipt & Made Addition Although The Said Interest Is Inextricably Linked To The Project & Is Purely A Capital Receipt & Hence The Aforesaid Addition Is Liable To Be Deleted. 3. That The Ld. Ao Has Erred Both In Law & Facts By Treating Capital Receipt As Revenue 5. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add Or To Amend The Above Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal. 6. For These & Among Other Grounds To Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing, Adequate Relief As May Be Deemed Fit Be Granted In The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115J

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.384&385/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Plot No.7622/4706, Press Chhaka Gajapati Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 PAN No. : AAHCA 6638 E (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, AR िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 21/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncement :…

M/S. Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 384/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.384&385/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Plot No.7622/4706, Press Chhaka Gajapati Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 Pan No. : Aahca 6638 E (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.09.2019, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee For A.Y.2013-2014 Are As Under :- 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Is Illegal, Arbitrary Contrary To Evidence On Record & Without Application Of Mind & For That Matter The Said Order Is Liable To Be Quashed And/Or Annulled. 2. That On The Facts Of Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Treating Interest On Fdr & Flexi Deposit Amounting To Rs. 1,08,02,969/- As Revenue Receipt & Made Addition Although The Said Interest Is Inextricably Linked To The Project & Is Purely A Capital Receipt & Hence The Aforesaid Addition Is Liable To Be Deleted. 3. That The Ld. Ao Has Erred Both In Law & Facts By Treating Capital Receipt As Revenue 5. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add Or To Amend The Above Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal. 6. For These & Among Other Grounds To Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing, Adequate Relief As May Be Deemed Fit Be Granted In The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115J

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.384&385/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Plot No.7622/4706, Press Chhaka Gajapati Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 PAN No. : AAHCA 6638 E (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, AR िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 21/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncement :…

M/S. Haridaspur Paradip Railway Company Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 383/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.383/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Haridaspur Paradip Railway Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Company Limited, Bhubaneswar J/7, Pal Heights, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. : Aabch 9319 R (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.09.2019, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Year 2014-2015, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Is Illegal, Arbitrary Contrary To Evidence On Record & Without Application Of Mind & For That Matter The Said Order Is Liable To Be Quashed And/Or Annulled. 2. That On The Facts Of Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Treating Interest On Fdr & Flexi Deposit Amounting To Rs.3,27,79,005/- As Revenue Receipt & Made Addition Although The Said Interest Is Inextricably Linked To The Project & Is Purely A Capital Receipt & Hence The Aforesaid Addition Is Liable To Be Deleted. 3. That The Ld. Ao Has Erred Both In Law & Facts By Treating Capital Receipt As Revenue. 5. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add Or To Amend The Above Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal. 6. For These & Among Other Grounds To Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing, Adequate Relief As May Be Deemed Fit Be Granted In The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115J

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.383/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s Haridaspur Paradip Railway Vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Company Limited, Bhubaneswar J/7, Pal Heights, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar-751013 PAN No. : AABCH 9319 R (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, AR िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 09/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Prono…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. M/S Career Point Infra Ltd., Kota

ITA 720/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Aug 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Paul, DCIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…not be treated as income. Similar view was expressed by the Supreme Court in the case Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. 12000] 243 ITR 2. Identical view was also taken by the Supreme Court in the cases of Bongaigaon Refinary and Petrochemicals Ltd. 12001] 251 ITR 329 and Karnataka Power Corporation 120011247 1TR 268. HIGH COURT OF DELHI in Vodafone South Ltd v. Commissioner of Income-tax 61 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi) held- Where assessee having availed of loan from HSBC, advanced said amount to its holding company, i.e., SCL, since there was a direct nexus between earning of interest on loan advanced by assessee…

DCIT, Circle-10(1) vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corp. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4432/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2019AY 2000-2001

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 4432/Del/2005 (A.Y. 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 4433/Del/2005 (A.Y. 2001-02)

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 56

…ome earned during the construction period which reduces the cost of project as the miscellaneous income subject to tax u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as it was held in the case of Bongaigaon Refinary and Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (251 ITR 329 SC) that receipts / items of income received during the construction period are not taxable income but was to be adjusted against the project cost. Same view was taken in the case of CIT Vs. Bokaro Steel Limited [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) 4) The Ld. CIT, Delhi -IV issued notice u/s 263 on the basis of suggestion made by the audit party which cannot…

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1153/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 4432/Del/2005 (A.Y. 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 4433/Del/2005 (A.Y. 2001-02)

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 56

…ome earned during the construction period which reduces the cost of project as the miscellaneous income subject to tax u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as it was held in the case of Bongaigaon Refinary and Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (251 ITR 329 SC) that receipts / items of income received during the construction period are not taxable income but was to be adjusted against the project cost. Same view was taken in the case of CIT Vs. Bokaro Steel Limited [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) 4) The Ld. CIT, Delhi -IV issued notice u/s 263 on the basis of suggestion made by the audit party which cannot…

DCIT, Circle-10(1) vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4433/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 4432/Del/2005 (A.Y. 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 4433/Del/2005 (A.Y. 2001-02)

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 56

…ome earned during the construction period which reduces the cost of project as the miscellaneous income subject to tax u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as it was held in the case of Bongaigaon Refinary and Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (251 ITR 329 SC) that receipts / items of income received during the construction period are not taxable income but was to be adjusted against the project cost. Same view was taken in the case of CIT Vs. Bokaro Steel Limited [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) 4) The Ld. CIT, Delhi -IV issued notice u/s 263 on the basis of suggestion made by the audit party which cannot…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bokaro Power Supply Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5273/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Vs. M/S. Bokaro Power Supply Circle-5(1), New Delhi Co. Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Ispat Bhavan, Lodi Road, New Delhi Pan :Aabcb8976G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar, Sr.Dr Respondent By Shri P.N. Shastri, Ca & Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv.

Section 143(2)

…plicable to the present case, as discussed. This is in consonance with "Bokaro Steel Ltd." (supra), "Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mill" (supra), "CIT Vs. Karnataka Power Corporation", 247 ITR 268 (SC) and "Bongaigaon Refinery and Petro Chemical Co. Ltd. vs. CIT", 251 ITR 329 (SC), wherein also, it has been laid down that any receipt inextricably linked to the setting up of the project is capital receipt not liable to tax and going to reduce the cost of the project. In the present case too. the funds infused by the assessee company were inextricably linked with the setting 4 up of the power plant. Likewise, the inter…

Ongc Mangalore Petrochemicals Ltd, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 1522/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Ongc Mangalore Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Petrochemicals Ltd., Income-Tax, Mangalore Special Economic Circle-1(1), Zone, Mangalore. Permude Village, Mangalore – 574 509. Pan : Aafcm 0322 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. B. R. Kamath, Ca Revenue By : Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. B. R. Kamath, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

…Consortium Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra), is in line with Bokaro Steel Ltd., (226 ITR 315) of the Hon’ble Apex Court and that the Hon’ble Court in the cases of CIT Vs. Karnataka Power Corporation (247 ITR 268) (SC), and Bongaigon Refinery and Petrochemical Co. Ltd., (251 ITR 329) (SC) held that such receipts are not income. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case on hand and the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indian Oil Panipat Power Consortium Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra) and the other decisions referred to by us (supra), we are unable to sustain the view taken by the learned CIT(A…

The ITO, Ward-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue, as well as Cross Objection filed by Assessee both, are dismissed

ITA 1710/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1710/Ahd/2016 With C.O. 120/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Ito, M/S. Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd., Ward-1(1), Vs. Adani House, Ahmedabad. Nr. Mithakhali Six Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380002. Pan: Aagca9379P

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar & Parin
Section 234BSection 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 56

…pitalized. For coming to such conclusion, the CIT(A) has taken cognizance of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd. (supra), Karnataka corporation Sugar Mills Ltd. & Bongaigaon Refinery & Petro Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 329 which in turn distinguish the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals Fertilizers Ltd. (supra). The CIT(A) has observed on facts that assessee kept fixed deposit as margin money with SBI for obtaining bank guarantee to avail term loan facility for the project related works. The margin money kept is 10% of the bank guar…

The ITO, Ward-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, cross objection of the assessee on this score stands allowed

ITA 1430/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1430/Ahd/2015 With Cross Objection No. 114/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Appellant: Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R
Section 56

…pitalized. For coming to such conclusion, the CIT(A) has taken cognizance of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd. (supra), Karnataka corporation Sugar Mills Ltd. & Bongaigaon Refinery & Petro Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 329 which in turn distinguish the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals Fertilizers Ltd. (supra). The CIT(A) has observed on facts that assessee kept fixed deposit as margin money with SBI for obtaining bank guarantee to avail term loan facility for the project related works. The margin money kept is 10% of the bank guar…

M/S. Jaipur Tax Weaving Park Ltd., Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 31/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Her.”

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…pts are revenue in nature or capital so as to reduce its capital cost. The Hon'ble Court by following the theory enunciated in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd. held in favour of the assessee. 16. In the case of Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. v/s CIT (251 ITR 329) (SC) also judgement of the Hon'ble SC in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd. was followed. It is therefore sincerely submitted that the action of the Id. AO and Id. CIT (A) may kindly be reversed and appeal may please be allowed. 7. The ld DR is heard who has vehemently argued the matter. He has taken us through the findings of the AO and the ld CIT…