Calcutta in CIT v. Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd.

334 ITR 293High Court2011#11510 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Judgments citing Calcutta in CIT v. Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd.

DCIT, Chennai vs. Tvs Investments Lrd., Chennai

In the result, the Revenue's appeal as well as the assessee's Cross Objection are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 262/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.262/Chny/2017 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit M/S. Tvs Capital Funds (P) Limited (Formerly Known As Tvs Investments Limited) Corporate Circle-3(1) बनाम/ Jayalakshmi Estates, Chennai-600 034. Vs. No.29, (Old No.8), Haddows Road Chennai-600 006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaact-1154-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. D. Praveen (Jcit) -Ld. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15-05-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Dr. D. Praveen (JCIT) -Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, (Advocate)-Ld. AR

…e observations made in the later decision in the case of Vodafone (supra), we do not find that this a case which would fall within the parameters of the decision in the case of McDowell & Company Ltd. (supra). 13.6 In the case of CIT vs Oberoi Hotels (P) ltd. 334 ITR 293(Kolkata) ; it was held as follows: "We also appreciate the reason of the Assessing Officer that the assessee company could have easily waited for a reasonable period of time for watching the market and could also have invested a further amount of Rs. 9 to 1 O Crore to revive the business of M/s SKB. It is not within the province of the Assessing…

ACIT - 21(2), Mumbai vs. Kalpana Shripal Morakhia, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3003/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54F

…nable and, therefore, calls for no reconsideration by a larger Bench." 20. In this connection, I find ratios of other judgments relied upon by the appellant equally relevant here and applicable to the facts of the instant case viz., CIT v Oberoi Hotels P Ltd. 334 ITR 293 (Cal), Asst. CIT v Biraj Investment P Ltd. 210 Taxman 418 (Guj), Bhoruka Engineering Industries Ltd. v DCIT 356 ITR 25 (Kar). DCIT v Mahendra M Mehta 89 TTJ 1 (Mum-Trib), ADIT v Maersk Line UK Ltd. 149 TTJ 537 (Kol-Trib). CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers P Ltd. 326 ITR 1 (SC), Union of India v Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC), CIT vs Spe…

The DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 4345/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2021AY 2003-2004

Bench: Known As Nicholas Piramal Mumbai - 400020 India Ltd.,) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn4538P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dcit. Circle 7(1), Vs. M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan (Formerly Known As Piramal Healthcare Mumbai - 400020 Ltd.,) (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.,) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn4538P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income (Formerly Known As Piramal Tax Healthcare Ltd.,) Range 7(3)(2), (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal Mumbai - 400020 India Ltd.,) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn4538P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Piramal Enterprises Limited

Section 143(3)

…of the assessee. The appeal shall accordingly stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. 21.8. Similar were the views expressed by the Hon‟ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd., reported in 334 ITR 293 and Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Bhoruka Engineering Industries Ltd., vs. DCIT reported in 356 ITR 25. 21.9. In view of our aforesaid observations in the facts and circumstances of the instant case and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that the ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in making enhance…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Sunil Haripant Pophale, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 448/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)

…he transaction was pre-planned by the assessee would not affect the genuineness of transaction, where the transaction has been undertaken by the assessee within framework of law. 29. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT Vs. Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd. (2011) 334 ITR 293 (Cal) had considered the similar proposition. In the facts before the Hon’ble High Court, the assessee purchased the shares of the company SKB in 1991 and later on, also subscribed to the additional shares at a hefty premium of ₹ 1800/- per share of ₹ 100/- face value. However, immediately thereafter, the assessee sold his shares at the price of…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 447/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)

…he transaction was pre-planned by the assessee would not affect the genuineness of transaction, where the transaction has been undertaken by the assessee within framework of law. 29. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT Vs. Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd. (2011) 334 ITR 293 (Cal) had considered the similar proposition. In the facts before the Hon’ble High Court, the assessee purchased the shares of the company SKB in 1991 and later on, also subscribed to the additional shares at a hefty premium of ₹ 1800/- per share of ₹ 100/- face value. However, immediately thereafter, the assessee sold his shares at the price of…

Sunil Haripant Pophale, Nashik vs. Joint Commissioner of Inocme-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 322/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)

…he transaction was pre-planned by the assessee would not affect the genuineness of transaction, where the transaction has been undertaken by the assessee within framework of law. 29. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT Vs. Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd. (2011) 334 ITR 293 (Cal) had considered the similar proposition. In the facts before the Hon’ble High Court, the assessee purchased the shares of the company SKB in 1991 and later on, also subscribed to the additional shares at a hefty premium of ₹ 1800/- per share of ₹ 100/- face value. However, immediately thereafter, the assessee sold his shares at the price of…

Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 301/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422403 …. Pan: Aahpp4573G Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 2, Nashik …. Vs. Mr. Sunil Haripant Pophale, C/O Vadivarhe Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Gat No.204, Nashik Mumbai Highway, Vadivarhe, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422403 Pan: Aahpp4573G आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Sunita Ajay Ramnathkar, 22, Parijat, 95 Marine Drive, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Mumbai – 400002 …. Pan: Aafpr1193J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 2, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)

…he transaction was pre-planned by the assessee would not affect the genuineness of transaction, where the transaction has been undertaken by the assessee within framework of law. 29. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT Vs. Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd. (2011) 334 ITR 293 (Cal) had considered the similar proposition. In the facts before the Hon’ble High Court, the assessee purchased the shares of the company SKB in 1991 and later on, also subscribed to the additional shares at a hefty premium of ₹ 1800/- per share of ₹ 100/- face value. However, immediately thereafter, the assessee sold his shares at the price of…

The Dy. DIT (Exemption), Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Friends of Wwb India, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assesseee both are dismissed

ITA 1608/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…d counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue that the ratio of McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) is applicable to the facts of the present case therefore cannot be accepted. 15. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in Oberoi Hotels P. Ltd. in 334 ITR 293 has made following relevant observations:- “In our opinion, so long the decision in the case ofAzadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) is not held to be per- incuriam by a larger Bench decision of the Supreme Court as done in the case of Official Liquidator v. Dayanand [2008] 10 SCC 1 relied upon by Mr. Saraf, the High Courts should be bound…

Aktiebolaget Electrolux Sweden, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (It) RG I, Mumbai

ITA 7628/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Parthasarathy Choudhuryअपील सं/.Ita No.7628/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2006-07 अपील सं/.Ita No.8695/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2007-08 Aktiebolaget Electrolux Sweden Income Tax Officer-1(3) C/O. Srbc & Associates14Th Floor, Rani Mansion, 2Nd Floor Vs The Ruby, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Murbad Road, Kalyan Dadar (W),Mumbai-400 028. Mumbai. Pan: Aadca 9239 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri K. Krishna Murty सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02-09-2015 सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21-10-2015 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dt. 06/09/2012 & 27/09/2009 Of Drp-I, Mumbai, The Assessee, Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal For The Above Mentioned Two Orders Respectively:

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri K. Krishna Murty
Section 234ASection 234BSection 234bSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…अिधकरण, ‘ए’ खंडपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI ABENCH सव"ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य एवं पाथ"सारथी चौधरी,"याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member & Parthasarathy Choudhury,Judicial Member अपील सं/.ITA No.7628/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2006-07 अपील सं/.ITA No.8695/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2007-08 Aktiebolaget Electrolux Sweden Income tax Officer-1(3) C/o. SRBC & Associates14th Floor, Rani Mansion, 2nd floor Vs The Ruby, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Murbad Road, Kalyan D…

Calcutta in CIT v. Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd. (334 ITR 293) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax