Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT

202 ITR 1High Court1993#7593 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also reported as

70 Taxmann 505

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 2(14)(iii)Section 2(47)(iv)

Judgments citing Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT

M/S SOVA,PANAJI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 24/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2018-19 M/S Sova Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan: Aacfs8862Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 263Section 56

…In directing the Revenue to allow consequential depreciation on capitalisation of ‘stamp duty’ as ‘license’ an intangible asset we place our reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of ‘Ciba of India Ltd. Vs CIT’ [1993, 202 ITR 1 (Bom)]. The concern of the appellant about the para 8 of the impugned order stands answered accordingly. 17. In result, the appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 the order pronounced in the open court on date mentioned hereinbefore. -S/d- -S/d- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE G. D. PADMAHSHALI…

MR POPATRAO DASHRATHRAO SURYAWANSHI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(4), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 Mr. Popatrao Dashrathrao Suryawanshi Ito, Ward 7(4), Pune S.No.38, Tingre Nagar, Havaldar Mala, Vs. Vishrantwadi, Pune – 411015 Pan: Adhps2643F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Department By : Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 19-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-01-2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 45(2)Section 54BSection 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2017-18 Mr. Popatrao Dashrathrao Suryawanshi ITO, Ward 7(4), Pune S.No.38, Tingre Nagar, Havaldar Mala, Vs. Vishrantwadi, Pune – 411015 PAN: ADHPS2643F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Department by : Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 19-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 21-01-2026 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.12.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi re…

ITO, WAR-4(1), JAIPUR vs. SHRI AMIT AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 267/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (PCIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68

…h the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Bhogilal Ramjibhai Atara (supra) that the law is not clueless in this regard; the said decision having been rendered without considering the decision by the said Court in CIT v. Hides & Leather Products (P.) Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj.). (emphasis supplied)…. 6. In the result, the assessee's appeal is dismissed.” (5) In the case of GAC Shipping (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs JCIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 347 (Cochin - Trib.) , it was held that: “21. We have heard both parties and perused the record. The argument of the assessee's counsel is devoid of merit. In our opinion, these cre…

PLUTO SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 10(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5872/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Pluto Securities Private Ltd. Dcit Circle- 10(3)(2) L-1/110, The Summit, Near Room No. 509, Sawan Club, Vile Parle (E), Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400057. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaacp8330R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivram Sr Advocate with Shri Rahul Kakkani AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikiyen (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 57

…incurred are of normal business expenditure of the corporate entity and are allowable as business expenditure. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIBA of India Ltd. vs. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom. HC) and Dy.CIT vs. Ozoneland Agro P. Ltd. [2018] 64 ITR (Trib.) 6 (Mum.Trib). 15. On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. DR further submits that in case, the Tribunal deem it appropriate to consider the allowance under section 37 in that eventuality, the…

SUBHSH GHAI,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 11(1), MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for

ITA 3766/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Subhash Ghai Acit- 11(1) 6, Bashiron, T.P.S, 29Th Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bandra (West), Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400050. Pan: Aafpg8264K Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rahul K. Hakani (Ar) Respondent By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop (Sr. Ar)

For Appellant: Shri Rahul K. Hakani (AR)For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)

…dered under section 37 of the Act and the assessing officer may be directed to examine the claim of the assessee. In support of his submission the learned AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in SIBA of India Ltd versus CIT 202 ITR 1(Bombay). 12. On the other hand the learned DR for the revenue supported the order of authorities below. ITA No. 3766 Mum 2016-M/s Subhash Ghai 13. We have considered the rival assumption of the parties and have gone through the orders of authorities below. The assessing officer disallowed the water expenses holding that such expenses incurred ca…

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 5986/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Dr. K. ShivaramFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No. 5986/MUM/2017 (A.Y: 2013-14) M/s. Housing Development Dy. CIT CC-5(4), Room No. 1927, v. and Infrastructure Limited 19th Floor, Air India Building, 9th Floor, HDIL Towers, Nariman point, Mumbai – 400 021 Anant Kanekar Marg, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051 PAN No: AAACH 5443 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Dr. K. Shivaram Shri Rahul K. Hakani Revenue by : Shri Anadi Varma Date of Hearing : 13.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2018…

ACIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SUMITOMO CHEMICAL (I) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 578/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Rajendra, Am & Sri Pawan Singh, Jm Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No.578/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Paras S. Savla ARFor Respondent: Shri Aaraj Garodia, DR
Section 143(3)

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “J” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री राजेंद्र, लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री पवन ससंह न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SRI PAWAN SINGH, JM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No.578/Mum/2017 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2010-11) M/s. Sumitomo Chemical (I) Pvt. Ltd., ACIT-1(3)(1), 197/5, 7th Floor, Vs. Mumbai Moti Mahal, J.T. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020. .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No.AAECS3750L अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Paras S. Savla AR प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent…

P.NAGESWARA RAO,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 364/VIZ/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleposani Nageswara Rao, Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), D.No. 11-62-135/A, Vijayawada. Canal Road, Vijayawada. Pan No. Aeqpp 7500 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Appala Raju – Sr.DR
Section 41(1)

…ability. 4.6(f) The case Laws cited by the appellant in his submission dated 13.7.2015 can be distinguished on facts from that of appellant's case. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. (P. Nageswara Rao) Hides and Leather Products PL Ltd. (1975) 101 ITR 61(Guj.) has held that where the supplier takes no action to recover the amount for a long period, cessation of liability maybe infected- Hence, I am of the view that action of Assessing Officer in disallowing amounts in respect of other twelve creditors to the tune of Rs. 18,52,103/- in this regard is in order end hence confirmed. 4.6 (g) To summari…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 937/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…mission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294. The apex court considered the decisions in Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. I…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 935/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…mission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294. The apex court considered the decisions in Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. I…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 934/JPR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…mission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294. The apex court considered the decisions in Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. I…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 933/JPR/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…mission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294. The apex court considered the decisions in Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. I…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 890/JPR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…mission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294. The apex court considered the decisions in Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. I…

ANCHOR ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CEN.CIR.41, MUMBAI

In the result of appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6930/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…ount of profit computed after the disallowance. It was further submitted by him that alternative prayer can be made by assessee even in absence of as specific ground in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIBA of India Ltd. V. CIT 202 ITR 1 (Bom) wherein it was held that Tribunal has ample powers for allowing an alternative claim and the claim of the assessee should not have been turned down by the Tribunal even without any specific ground or claim in this regard before the Tribunal or before the lower authorities. 10 Anchor Electricals 14. Per contra, Ld. CIT-DR vehemently opposed t…

DCIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SUMITOMO CHEMICAL P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 3915/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Gargdy. C I T – 1(3)(1) M/S. Sumitomo Chemical P. Ltd. Room No. 564, 5Th Floor 6Th Floor, Moti Mahal Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 195, J. Tata Road, Churchgate Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaecs3750L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar RaiFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Gandhi &
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 43(1)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member Dy. C I T – 1(3)(1) M/s. Sumitomo Chemical P. Ltd. Room No. 564, 5th Floor 6th Floor, Moti Mahal Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 195, J. Tata Road, Churchgate Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400020 PAN – AAECS3750L Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Respondent by: Shri Alpesh Gandhi & Ms. Shardha Kothari Date of Hearing: 01.03.2017 Date of Pronouncement: 15.03.2017 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT…

Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT (202 ITR 1) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax