CCE v. M/s. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries

220 CTR 98Supreme Court of India2008#8320 most cited
13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

use of equipmentsection 90(1)make available clausefees for included servicessection 90(2)section 9(1)(vi)business connectionenduring benefitsection 9(1)(vii)computer softwaresection 144c(1)put to use

Judgments citing CCE v. M/s. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1970/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18th floor, 10, 9th floor, Old CGO Building, Camac Street, Vs. MK Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 JCIT, Central Circle-1(4), M/s Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Vs. Industry House, 18th floo…

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1020/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18th floor, 10, 9th floor, Old CGO Building, Camac Street, Vs. MK Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 JCIT, Central Circle-1(4), M/s Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Vs. Industry House, 18th floo…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5193/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.508/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Edenred SA C/o SRBC Associates & LLP 14th Floor, The Ruby ……………. Appellant 29, Senapati Bapat Marg Dadar, Mumbai 400 028 PAN – AACCE9031G v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax …………….Respondent International Taxation Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai ITA no.7247/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Edenred SA C/o Walker Chandiok & Co. LLP 16th Floor, Tower–II, Indiabulls Finance Centre ……………. Appellant Senapati Bapat Marg, El…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7248/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.508/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Edenred SA C/o SRBC Associates & LLP 14th Floor, The Ruby ……………. Appellant 29, Senapati Bapat Marg Dadar, Mumbai 400 028 PAN – AACCE9031G v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax …………….Respondent International Taxation Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai ITA no.7247/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Edenred SA C/o Walker Chandiok & Co. LLP 16th Floor, Tower–II, Indiabulls Finance Centre ……………. Appellant Senapati Bapat Marg, El…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7247/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.508/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Edenred SA C/o SRBC Associates & LLP 14th Floor, The Ruby ……………. Appellant 29, Senapati Bapat Marg Dadar, Mumbai 400 028 PAN – AACCE9031G v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax …………….Respondent International Taxation Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai ITA no.7247/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Edenred SA C/o Walker Chandiok & Co. LLP 16th Floor, Tower–II, Indiabulls Finance Centre ……………. Appellant Senapati Bapat Marg, El…

EDENRED SA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 508/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.508/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Edenred SA C/o SRBC Associates & LLP 14th Floor, The Ruby ……………. Appellant 29, Senapati Bapat Marg Dadar, Mumbai 400 028 PAN – AACCE9031G v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax …………….Respondent International Taxation Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai ITA no.7247/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Edenred SA C/o Walker Chandiok & Co. LLP 16th Floor, Tower–II, Indiabulls Finance Centre ……………. Appellant Senapati Bapat Marg, El…

M/S. ESSITY HYGIENE AND HEALTH AB,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 778/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.778/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2017-18) M/S. Essity Hygiene & Health Ab, C/O. Sudit K. Parekh & Co. Llp, Urmi Axis, 6Th Floor, Famous Studio Lane, Dr.E.Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai 400 011. Pan: Aatcs-0899-K ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax- (International Taxation)- 4(2)(1), 17Th Floor, Room No.1708, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jitendra Jain ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Milind S. Chavan सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 10/06/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Milind S. Chavan
Section 143(3)

…DT is binding on the AO and not on the assessee or the Tribunal or other appellate authorities. It has been held so authoritatively in CIT Vs. Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. (1997) 228 ITR 463 (SC) as reiterated in CCE Vs. M/s. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries (2008) 220 CTR 98 (SC). Ex consequenti, the Circular transgressing the boundaries of section 90(1) of the Act, cannot bind the Tribunal. 13. Notwithstanding the above, it can be seen that the CBDT has panned out a fresh requirement of separate notification to be issued for India importing the benefits of the DTAA from second State to the DTAA with the first State b…

GRI RENEWABLE INDUSTRIES S L (FORMERLY KNOWN AS GONVARRI EOLICA S L),MADRID vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE -1, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 202/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.202/Pun/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 90Section 90(1)

…is binding on the AO and not on the assessee or the Tribunal or other appellate authorities. It has been held so authoritatively in CIT Vs. Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. (1997) 228 ITR 463 (SC) as reiterated in CCE Vs. M/s. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries (2008) 220 CTR 98 (SC). Ex consequenti, the Circular transgressing the boundaries of section 90(1) of the Act, cannot bind the Tribunal. 13. Notwithstanding the above, it can be seen that the CBDT has panned out a fresh requirement of separate notification to be issued for India importing the benefits of the DTAA from second State to the DTAA with the first Stat…

STERIA (INDIA) LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 8 , NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 5745/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…tion it will not be open to a Court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. To the same effect are the following decisions:  CCE v. Ratan Melting & Wire Industries : 220 CTR 98 (SC)  J&K Synthetics vs. CIT: 83 ITR 335 (SC)  CIT vs. Hero Cycles Pvt Ltd : 228 ITR 463(SC)  CIT v. Nagesh Knitwears (P.) Ltd : [2012] 345 ITR 135 (Delhi)  CIT v. Central Bank of India: 185 ITR 6 (Bom)  CIT v. Indian Oil Co. Ltd : [2012] 254 CTR 113 (Bom) 50. He further submitted that the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of Tribunal in the c…

M/S STERIA NDIA LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ADDL CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 741/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…tion it will not be open to a Court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. To the same effect are the following decisions:  CCE v. Ratan Melting & Wire Industries : 220 CTR 98 (SC)  J&K Synthetics vs. CIT: 83 ITR 335 (SC)  CIT vs. Hero Cycles Pvt Ltd : 228 ITR 463(SC)  CIT v. Nagesh Knitwears (P.) Ltd : [2012] 345 ITR 135 (Delhi)  CIT v. Central Bank of India: 185 ITR 6 (Bom)  CIT v. Indian Oil Co. Ltd : [2012] 254 CTR 113 (Bom) 50. He further submitted that the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of Tribunal in the c…

STERIA INDIA LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAQL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 3992/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…tion it will not be open to a Court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. To the same effect are the following decisions:  CCE v. Ratan Melting & Wire Industries : 220 CTR 98 (SC)  J&K Synthetics vs. CIT: 83 ITR 335 (SC)  CIT vs. Hero Cycles Pvt Ltd : 228 ITR 463(SC)  CIT v. Nagesh Knitwears (P.) Ltd : [2012] 345 ITR 135 (Delhi)  CIT v. Central Bank of India: 185 ITR 6 (Bom)  CIT v. Indian Oil Co. Ltd : [2012] 254 CTR 113 (Bom) 50. He further submitted that the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of Tribunal in the c…

DCIT, CC-I, LUDHIANA vs. M/S COSMOS INFRA ENGINEERING (INDIA) LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1636/CHANDI/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Cosmos Infra Engineering Cc-1, (India)Ltd., 4-Battry Line, Civil Ludhiana. Lines, Delhi. Pan: Aaacc0017C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Smt.Zenia Handa, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Adv
Section 14ASection 251

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The D.C.I.T., Vs. M/s Cosmos Infra Engineering CC-1, (India)Ltd., 4-Battry Line, Civil Ludhiana. Lines, Delhi. PAN: AAACC0017C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Smt.Zenia Handa, Addl.CIT Respondent by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Date of hearing :16.04.2018 Date of Pronouncement :26.04.2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana (hereinaft…

DCIT CEN CIR 20, MUMBAI vs. ANUPAMA P JAIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 925/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amarjit Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.925/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Asst. Cit, Central Circle-20, Smt. Anupama P. Jain Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, बिाम/ B-201, Minoo Minar, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 053 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Actpj 2249 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri T. A. Khan प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई की तायीख / : 10.07.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : 06.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order By The Ld. Cit(A) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2006-07, In The Matter Of Penalty Imposed U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri T. A. KhanFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…s no force as the law regarding bindingness of circulars issued by CBDT has been later on explained by Larger Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ratan Melting & Wire Industries (the decision rendered by five judges of Hon'ble Supreme Court),220 CTR 98 (SC) wherein it has been held that it is for the Court to declare what the particular provision of statue states and it is not for executive; a circular cannot be given effect to in preference to the view expressed in a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court or the High Court; a circular which is contrary to the statutory provisions has really no e…

CCE v. M/s. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries (220 CTR 98) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax