CIT v. Ajmera Industries Private Ltd.

103 ITR 245High Court1976#13229 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Ajmera Industries Private Ltd.

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S R.P.RAI ESTATE PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 28/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna03 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Circle-1, Muzaffarpur M/S. R.P. Rai Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs 19, Goharua, Patliputra Colony, Patliputra, Patna- 800013. Pan: Aaccr 4972 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, Jcit, Dr Respondent By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2024 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.06.2020 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal), Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, JCIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate

Section 143(2)

…ness. The Income Tax Officer was directed to treat the income arising out of the letting out of the assets as business income. The ld. AR also placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Ajmera Industries Pvt. Ltd. 103 ITR 245 where the Hon’ble High Court has taken similar view if assessee derives any income by exploitation of its commercial assets whether by itself or through other agencies such income should be considered as business income of the assessee. Therefore, he prayed before the bench that the ld. CIT(A) has rightly passed a proper order following the judgm…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(2), HYDERABAD vs. ELGEN (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 244/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2015-16 Income-Tax Officer, Vs. Elgen (India) Pvt Ltd., Ward - 17(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aaace 8520C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar Assessee By: Shri M. Poorna Chander Rao Date Of Hearing: 15/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/04/2021

For Appellant: Shri M. Poorna Chander RaoFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar

Section 143(3)

…y themselves create an Independent source of Income unrelated to the business which was being set it, was also contended that the observations of the Delhi High Court were based on the Calcutta High Court's decision in CIT v. Ajmera Industries (A) Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 245 and they were not binding on the Tribunal, such a question not being for decision before the Delhi High Court. 10. Shri Ganesan next submitted that the various authorities of the High Courts relied upon by the Tribunal in its order for the earlier two assessment years were clearly distinguishable and did not in terms deal with the issue raised by…

M/S. ASIA INSULATED WIRES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 11(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1361/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Asia Insulated Wires Pvt. Ltd…………....…………..……………...……..….…….........Appellant No.6A, “Basera Enclave” 6Th Floor Wing 2 Of Orbit City 82, Raja S.C. Mullick Road Kolkata -700 084 [Pan : Aadca 9496 L] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(2), Kolkata….……………………….……..……............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Saurav Kumar, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 25Th , 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 9Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 144Section 250

…from other sources”, for the following reasons:- a) The assessee has temporarily let out its factory on rent. The factory building is classified as plant and machinery. b) The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ajmira Industries Pvt. Ltd. (1976) 103 ITR 245 held that the if an assessee derives any income by exploitation of commercial assets whether itself or though other agencies, such income should be assessed under the head “business income”. 4.1. Further in the case of Commissioner of Excess Profit Tax vs. Sree Lakshmi Silk Mills Ltd. in 20 ITR 451, it was held as follows:- “If a commercial asse…

M/S. HYDERABAD DISTILLERIES & WINERIES PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal are allowed

ITA 740/HYD/2012[2008-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2008-19

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms Suchitra Kamblem/S Hyderabad Distilleries & Vs Acit Wineries Pvt. Ltd. A-4, Ida, Uppal Circle-2(2) Hyderabad-39 Hyderabad Aaach2679B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 5

…Products P. Ltd.: 283 ITR 162 (MP) • CIT v. Anand Rubber and Plastics (P.) Ltd.: 178 ITR 301 (P&H) • CIT v. Golden Engineering Works: 256 ITR 774 (P&H) • CIT Vs.Malabar and Pioneer Hosiery (P.) Ltd. 221 ITR 117 (Ker.) • CIT vs. Ajmera Industries Private Ltd.: 103 ITR 245 (Cal.) • CIT v. K. Ramaiah & Ors.: 159 ITR 929 (AP) • Coringa Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 62 ITR 523 (AP) Besides the above mentioned decisions, the Ld. AR also relied upon the decision in reference to expenditure incurred for the purpose of business which are as follows: • CIT vs. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. 53 ITR 140 (SC) • CIT vs. Birla Cotton Spg. And…

DCIT, CIR-13(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. CALCUTTA MUMBAI TRUCK TERMINAL LTD., HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 844/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Hon’Ble] I.T.A. No. 844/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-13(1), Kolkata.……………………..….Appellant Ayakar Bhavan Poorva 6Th Floor R. No. 610 110, Shantipally Kolkata – 700 107 Calcutta Mumbai Truck Terminal Ltd………………………………………………….……...Respondent 545, G.T. Road (South) Howrah - 711102 [Pan : Aabcc 0747 Q] Appearances By: Shri R.S. Sahay, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit, Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 20Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 1St March, 2018 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan :-

Section 22Section 250Section 80

…exploitation being unsold flats still owned by the assessee, Commissioner of income tax (appeals) rightly concluded that same shall be treated as income from house property by way of letting it out. 12. In the case of CIT v. Ajmera Industries (P.) Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 245 (Cal.) relied upon by the Tribunal below, a Division Bench of this Court was considering a case where the assessee was carrying on business and in course of its trading activities, the assessee was using and exploiting non-factory building including its godowns. In such a fact, the Division Bench was of the view that non-factory building includin…

GOLDEN SOYA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD NO, 2(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 574/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) I.T.A. No. 574/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 573/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2010-11) I.T.A. No. 572/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 571/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2008-09)

Section 57

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) I.T.A. No. 574/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 573/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2010-11) I.T.A. No. 572/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 571/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Golden Soya Limited ITO Ward2(1)(4) Emca House, 2nd Floor Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Room No. 208, 289 M.K. Road S.B.S. Road, Fort Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400 001. PAN : AAACG3593R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri S.V. Pikale Department by Shri Ram Tiwari Date of Hearing 13.9.2017 Date of Pronouncement 21.9.2017 O R D E R Al…

DCIT,CIRCLE-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CALCUTTA MUMBAI TRUCK TERMINAL LTD, HOWRAH

Accordingly, the ground no. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1189/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri R.S Sahay, FCA,, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, JCIT,ld.DR

Section 143(3)

…t if the subject matter of stock in trade includes godowns then it could reasonably be argued that income by exploiting those stock in trade would come under the purview of income from business. Similarly in CIT vs Ajmera Industries (P) Ltd reported in (1976) 103 ITR 245 (Cal) relied upon hereinabove, the assesee was using and exploiting non-factory building including its godowns. In such a fact, the Division Bench was of the view that non-factory building including the godowns clearly constituted commercial assets of the assessee which amounted to exploiting major portion of the same by letting out to some other…