CIT v. Ahmedabad Electricity Company

262 ITR 97High Court2003#7968 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Ahmedabad Electricity Company

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD.,VADODARA vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 343/AHD/2022[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2024AY 1996-97

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 1996-97 Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. The Dy.Cit Sardar Patel Vidyut Bhavan Vs Circle-1(1)(1) Race Course Vadodara – 390 007 Vadodara – 390 007 (Gujarat) Pan: Aaacg 8540 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish J. Shah, Ar & Shri Jimi Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Cit(A)”), Which Was Filed Against The Order Of By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”) U/S.143(3) R.W.S 254 Regarding The Unpaid Electricity Duty Under Section 43B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 1996-97. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit Asst. Year : 1996-97

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, AR &For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…nal’s order passed in ITA No.1930/Ahd/2001 dated 03-03-2008, confirmed the additions, holding that Electricity Duty is covered by section 43B of the IT Act, following the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. reported in 262 ITR 97(Guj.). As per this judgement, the issue relating to unpaid electricity duty was allowed in favour of Revenue and Disallowance of Lease Rentals was set aside for proper verification of facts submitted by the assessee. The Assessing Officer passed the order giving effect to the appellate order without giving proper opportunity to the assessee and ad…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI vs. ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 256/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati30 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 40Section 43B

…e licensee/assessee in respect of electricity duty collected by it for being passed on the State Government. We are in disagreement with the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 97 and we are in agreement with the decision of the Kerala High Court in Page 6 of 13 I.T.A. No.: 256/Gau/2019 C.O. No.: 13/Gau/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. the case of Kerala State Electricity Board- vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2010) 329 ITR 91. From another angle, the electricity duty collecte…

DCIT 1(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARSHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, MUMBAI

In the result , the Cross Objections preferred by the assessee for the Asst Year 2004-05 is partly allowed and Cross Objections preferred by the assessee for the Asst Year 2005-06 is allowed

ITA 1649/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2021AY 2004-05
Section 143(3)Section 69

…ssment for the Asst Year 2004-05. 6.1. We find that the ld CITA by following the order passed by his predecessor for the Asst Year 2001-02 and by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd reported in 262 ITR 97 (Guj). We find that the ld CITA by accepting the alternative argument of the assessee , had also directed the ld AO to grant deduction for payment of electricity duty made by the assessee before the due date of filing the return of income u/s 43B of the Act. 6.2. We find that this issue was the subject matter of adjudication by this tribunal in a…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 2, MEERUT vs. PASCHIMANCHAL VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM, MEERUT

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7308/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava(Through Video Conferencing) Paschimanchal Vidhyut Vs. Dcit Vitran Nigam Ltd., Circle - 2 C/O. Adv. Vinod Kumar Meerut Goel, 200, Western Kutchery Road, Meerut Pan No. Aaecp 5610 N (Appellant) (Respondent) & Dcit Vs. Paschimanchal Vidhyut Circle - 2 Vitran Nigam Ltd., Meerut C/O. Adv. Vinod Kumar Goel, 200, Western Kutchery Road, Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vinod Goel, Adv. Revenue By Smt. Sushma Singh, Cit- D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28/10/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 02/11/2020

Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40Section 43B

…esent assessee had collected the electricity duty. She further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. ITA No.7146 & 7308/Del/2017 Paschimanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. A.Y. 2014-15 6 Ahmedabad Electricty Co. Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 97 and CIT vs. Gujarat Vikas Nigam Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 539 (Guj). 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to disallowance u/s 43B. We find that identical issue arose in Assessee’s own case in A.Y. 2015-16 and the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal decided th…

PASCHIMANCHAL VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD.,MEERUT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, MEERUT

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7146/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava(Through Video Conferencing) Paschimanchal Vidhyut Vs. Dcit Vitran Nigam Ltd., Circle - 2 C/O. Adv. Vinod Kumar Meerut Goel, 200, Western Kutchery Road, Meerut Pan No. Aaecp 5610 N (Appellant) (Respondent) & Dcit Vs. Paschimanchal Vidhyut Circle - 2 Vitran Nigam Ltd., Meerut C/O. Adv. Vinod Kumar Goel, 200, Western Kutchery Road, Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vinod Goel, Adv. Revenue By Smt. Sushma Singh, Cit- D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28/10/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 02/11/2020

Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40Section 43B

…esent assessee had collected the electricity duty. She further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. ITA No.7146 & 7308/Del/2017 Paschimanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. A.Y. 2014-15 6 Ahmedabad Electricty Co. Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 97 and CIT vs. Gujarat Vikas Nigam Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 539 (Guj). 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to disallowance u/s 43B. We find that identical issue arose in Assessee’s own case in A.Y. 2015-16 and the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal decided th…

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 53/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…nder Electricity Duty Act, it is to be disallowed u/s. 43B of the Income Tax Act. (iv) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have brought his attention to the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat on identical issue as reported in CIT vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Company (262 ITR 97) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held, after an analysis of the provisions of Bombay Electricity Duty Act, 1958, whose provisions are analogous to the provisions of the Kerala State Electricity Duty Act, 1963, that "the liability of the electricity company to pay the duty collected to the Government had been spelt out in clear terms in the rele…

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 52/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…nder Electricity Duty Act, it is to be disallowed u/s. 43B of the Income Tax Act. (iv) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have brought his attention to the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat on identical issue as reported in CIT vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Company (262 ITR 97) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held, after an analysis of the provisions of Bombay Electricity Duty Act, 1958, whose provisions are analogous to the provisions of the Kerala State Electricity Duty Act, 1963, that "the liability of the electricity company to pay the duty collected to the Government had been spelt out in clear terms in the rele…

THE ANAND PEOPLES CO.-OP. BANK LTD.,,ANAND vs. DY. CIT, ANAND CIRCLE.,, ANAND

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

ITA 2100/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2100/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) The Anand People Co-Op Dcit बनाम/ Anand Circle, Bank Ltd. Vs. Anand Peoples Palace, Society, Sardar Gunj Road, Anand- 388001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaa At2 812 9 .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. DRFor Respondent: 26/06/2019
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 176

…ore us the assessee has placed reliance on the judicial pronouncements in the case of CIT vs. Morgan Securities 292 ITR 339, BDA Ltd. vs. DCIT (2002) 125 taxmann 182 (Mum), New Deal Finance Investment vs. DCIT 74 ITD 469 CIT vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. 262 ITR 97. It was also submitted that as per the provision of Sec. 36(2) of the Act the claim of bad debt should be allowed. We have perused the above referred judicial pronouncements and gone through the provision of 36(2) of the Act which read as under:- “No such deduction shall be allowed unless such debt or prat thereof has been taken into account in c…

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CIR-1(1), TVM, TVM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 30/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.29/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Kerala State Electricity Board, Income-Tax,Circle-1(1), Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Trivandrum. Trivandrum-695 004. [Pan:Aabck 5896J]

Section 28Section 43B

…ty Act, it is to be disallowed u/s. 43B of the Income Tax Act. I.T.A. Nos.29&30/Coch/2018 5. The CIT(A) ought to have brought his attention to the decision of the High Court of Gujarat on identical issue as reported in CIT vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Company (262 ITR 97) wherein the High Court has held, after an analysis of the provisions of Bombay Electricity Duty, 1958, whose provisions are analogous to the provisions of Kerala State Electricity Duty Act, 1963, that, “the liability of the electricity company to pay the duty collected to the Government had been spelt out in clear terms in the relevant statute an…

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 29/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.29/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Kerala State Electricity Board, Income-Tax,Circle-1(1), Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Trivandrum. Trivandrum-695 004. [Pan:Aabck 5896J]

Section 28Section 43B

…ty Act, it is to be disallowed u/s. 43B of the Income Tax Act. I.T.A. Nos.29&30/Coch/2018 5. The CIT(A) ought to have brought his attention to the decision of the High Court of Gujarat on identical issue as reported in CIT vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Company (262 ITR 97) wherein the High Court has held, after an analysis of the provisions of Bombay Electricity Duty, 1958, whose provisions are analogous to the provisions of Kerala State Electricity Duty Act, 1963, that, “the liability of the electricity company to pay the duty collected to the Government had been spelt out in clear terms in the relevant statute an…

DCIT 1(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELCTRICITY BOARD, MUMBAI

ITA 3559/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3559/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri H. N. Sinha, DRFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Sheth, AR
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)

…cumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating CO No. 160/Mum/2014 Maharashtra State Electricity Board, the facts of the case in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. 262 ITR 97 (Guj.)" 2. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of income of Rs. 101.01 crores accrued to the assessee on account of supplementary bills issued to the customers without appreciating that as per the mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee, the assessee was lia…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. V.KRISHNAMURTHY, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 424/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri. G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…uld suffice that when there were circumstances or material to indicate the reasonableness of the decision to treat the debt accounts of the assessee as it undisputedly was, in the instant case, and as held in CIT V :- 8 -: Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. [262 ITR 97] (Guj) and a catena of other judgements including TRF Ltd Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 SC. In view of the above discussion, the AO’s addition of Rs. 26,55,088/- on account of disallowance of bad debt is directed to the deleted. Accordingly, this ground is also allowed.” Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this grou…

M/S. SIVANANDHA MILLS LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2106/CHNY/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 143Section 143(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. पवन कुमार, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1216 & 2106/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/s. Sivanandha Mills Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner of 41, Periasamy Road (East), v. Income-tax / The DCIT, R.S.Puram, Company Circle-IV(2), Coimbatore-641002. Coimbatore. PAN AAKCS7439J (""यथ"/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" क" ओर /Appellant by : Shri R.…

SIVANANDHA MILLS LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1216/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 143Section 143(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. पवन कुमार, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1216 & 2106/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/s. Sivanandha Mills Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner of 41, Periasamy Road (East), v. Income-tax / The DCIT, R.S.Puram, Company Circle-IV(2), Coimbatore-641002. Coimbatore. PAN AAKCS7439J (""यथ"/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" क" ओर /Appellant by : Shri R.…