CIT, Central Madras v. Canara Workshop Pvt ltd (

136 ITR 481Reported decision#22446 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2020.

Judgments citing CIT, Central Madras v. Canara Workshop Pvt ltd (

M/S. Havells India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4695/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Vs Havells India Ltd. Acit 1, Raj Narian Marg, Ltu Civil Lines New Delhi New Delhi Aaach0351E (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 251Section 40Section 80I

…he losses incurred by the assessee in a priority industry could not be set- off against the profits of another priority industry. The Court also referred with approval the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of CIT vs. Bellis & Corcom (I) Ltd. 136 ITR 481 delivered in the context of Section 80-I of the Act wherein it was held that it is not permissible to compute the profits of the priority industry in respect of which the relief is claimed by taking into account the depreciation losses from other industries. The aforesaid provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 80-IA merely give legislative sanc…

M/S Nsl Sugars Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1228/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri A K Garodiaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT(DR-I), ITAT, Bangalore
Section 70Section 72Section 80A(1)Section 80CSection 80I

…only source of income of the assessee during that assessment year. The Assessee relied on the following decisions in support of its contention. CIT, Central Madras v/s Canara Workshop Pvt ltd (161 ITR 320) (SC) and CIT (WB)-v/s O.Belliss and Morecom(I) Ltd.(136 ITR 481)(Cal). 7. The CIT(Appeals) agreed with the submissions so made by the assessee and he directed the AO to allow deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act as claimed by the assessee. Following are the relevant observations of the CIT(Appeals):- “8. In the second ground of appeal, the deduction u/s.80IA has been restricted to Rs.22,09,10,637/- as against the…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Nsl Sugars Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue in ITA No

ITA 37/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri A K Garodiaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT(DR-I), ITAT, Bangalore
Section 70Section 72Section 80A(1)Section 80CSection 80I

…only source of income of the assessee during that assessment year. The Assessee relied on the following decisions in support of its contention. CIT, Central Madras v/s Canara Workshop Pvt ltd (161 ITR 320) (SC) and CIT (WB)-v/s O.Belliss and Morecom(I) Ltd.(136 ITR 481)(Cal). 7. The CIT(Appeals) agreed with the submissions so made by the assessee and he directed the AO to allow deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act as claimed by the assessee. Following are the relevant observations of the CIT(Appeals):- “8. In the second ground of appeal, the deduction u/s.80IA has been restricted to Rs.22,09,10,637/- as against the…

CIT, Central Madras v. Canara Workshop Pvt ltd ( (136 ITR 481) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax