CIT v. Apar Industries Ltd.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), CHURCHGATE MUMBAI vs. SHUBHENDU AMITABH, DELHI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Juducial Member

…ich was not less than tax payable on returned income which was accepted, question of levy of interest did not arise. In the submission, the assessee has also referred the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Apar Industries Ltd. 323 ITR 411 wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that interest u/s 234B of the being compensatory in nature and cannot be charged if the taxes are already paid by the assessee. A.Y. 2010-11 & 2013-14 12. Looking to the above facts and findings, we consider that the Assessing Officer has ignored the request of the assessee without specifying any reason therefo…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (4) MUMBAI, PRATHISHTHA BHAVAN CHURCHGATE vs. SHUBHENDU AMITABH, DELHI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Juducial Member

…ich was not less than tax payable on returned income which was accepted, question of levy of interest did not arise. In the submission, the assessee has also referred the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Apar Industries Ltd. 323 ITR 411 wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that interest u/s 234B of the being compensatory in nature and cannot be charged if the taxes are already paid by the assessee. A.Y. 2010-11 & 2013-14 12. Looking to the above facts and findings, we consider that the Assessing Officer has ignored the request of the assessee without specifying any reason therefo…

LATE RUSSI DINSHAW BAHADURJI BY HIS LEGAL HEIR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -19(3) (1) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…n of the parent statute."  CIT vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. (1995) (211 ITR 535) (Bom) "In any event, the language of the statute cannot be overridden by a form prescribed under the Rules framed under the Act."  CIT vs. Apar Industries Ltd. (2010) (323 ITR 411) (Bom) "26. A form provided by a rule-making authority which is a delegate of the Legislature cannot override a statutory provision. Forms are subservient to legislation. Forms are intended to facilitate the implementation of legislation. Forms cannot supplant legislation." 16 Late Russi Dinshaw Bahadurji By his legal heir 20. It is also a equal…

CHAMBER OF INDIAN CHARITABLE TRUSTS,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT/ COMM OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 2168 & 2169/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2022-23) Chamber Of Indian बिधम/ Pcit Charitable Trusts Mumbai-400020. Vs. Gala No.328-332, Linkway Estates, New Link Road, Malad (W), Mumbai- 400064. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaicc9627J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. J. Pardiwala & Mr. Sukhsagar Syal. Revenue By: Shri Nihar Samal (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Imposition Of Certain Impugned Conditions In The Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(E), Mumbai Dated 24.09.2021 & 24.05.2021, Whereby The Ld. Cit(E) Granted Registration U/S 12Ab(1)(A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) & Under Clause (Iii) Of The Second Proviso To Section 80G(5) Of The Act

…n of the parent statute.”  CIT vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. (1995) (211 ITR 535) (Bom) “In any event, the language of the statute cannot be overridden by a form prescribed under the Rules framed under the Act.”  CIT vs. Apar Industries Ltd. (2010) (323 ITR 411) (Bom) “26. A form provided by a rule-making authority which is a delegate of the Legislature cannot override a statutory provision. Forms are subservient to legislation. Forms are intended to facilitate the implementation of legislation. Forms cannot supplant legislation.”  CIT vs. Bombay State Transport Corporation (1979) (118 ITR 399) (Bom)…

CHAMBER OF INDIAN CHARITABLE TRUSTS,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT/ COMM OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 2168 & 2169/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2022-23) Chamber Of Indian बिधम/ Pcit Charitable Trusts Mumbai-400020. Vs. Gala No.328-332, Linkway Estates, New Link Road, Malad (W), Mumbai- 400064. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaicc9627J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. J. Pardiwala & Mr. Sukhsagar Syal. Revenue By: Shri Nihar Samal (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Imposition Of Certain Impugned Conditions In The Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(E), Mumbai Dated 24.09.2021 & 24.05.2021, Whereby The Ld. Cit(E) Granted Registration U/S 12Ab(1)(A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) & Under Clause (Iii) Of The Second Proviso To Section 80G(5) Of The Act

…n of the parent statute.”  CIT vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. (1995) (211 ITR 535) (Bom) “In any event, the language of the statute cannot be overridden by a form prescribed under the Rules framed under the Act.”  CIT vs. Apar Industries Ltd. (2010) (323 ITR 411) (Bom) “26. A form provided by a rule-making authority which is a delegate of the Legislature cannot override a statutory provision. Forms are subservient to legislation. Forms are intended to facilitate the implementation of legislation. Forms cannot supplant legislation.”  CIT vs. Bombay State Transport Corporation (1979) (118 ITR 399) (Bom)…

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT LTU-1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…e India referred to in that section; (iv) any deduction, from the Indian income-tax payable, allowed under section 91, on account of tax paid in a country outside India; and.....‖ 139. Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Apar Industries Ltd.: [2010] 323 ITR 411, by referring to CBDT (Circular No. 14 of 2006) on 28.12.2006, held that the amendment brought about by the Parliament by the Finance Act, 2006 by substituting the Explanation 1 to section 234B was clarificatory or curative in nature and therefore will have retrospective effect. Thus in view of the aforesaid decision, we direct the Assessing Offi…

THE DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal stand partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7486/Mum/2007 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Acit-(Ltu)-1 Ambuja Cements Limited बनाम/ World Trade Centre [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.] Elegant Business Park Centre-1, 29Th Floor, Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-05. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg-0569-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7494/Mum/2007 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Ambuja Cements Limited Dcit–Range-3(1) [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd] बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Elegant Business Park Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg 0569 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.222/Mum/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 7494/Mum/2007] (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Acit-(Ltu)-1 Ambuja Cements Limited बनाम/ [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.] World Trade Centre Elegant Business Park Centre-1, 29Th Floor, Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-05. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg-0569-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…interest was to be charged only after adjustment of tax credit. We find that the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) is in line with following binding judicial pronouncements: - i) CIT V/s Tulsyan NEC Ltd. [2011 330 ITR 226(SC)] ii) CIT V/s Apar Industries Ltd. [(2010)323 ITR 411(Bombay HC)] iii) CIT V/s Shiv Texyarn Ltd. [(2009) 182 Taxman 1(Madras HC)] iv) CIT V/s. Gujarat Mitra (P.) Ltd. [(2013) 214 taxman 35(Gujarat HC)] v) Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. V/s DCIT [(2004) 83 TTJ 427 (Chennai Tribunal)] vi) Phillips India Ltd. V/s. ACIT [(2005) 92 ITD 441 (Chandigarh Tribunal)] vii) Synthetic Ind. chemicals Ltd. V/s DCIT [(2004)…

ASST CIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainacit, Central Circle-38 M/S. Uniphos Enterprises Ltd. (Formerly United Phosphorous Ltd.) Room No. 32(1), Gr. Floor Vs. Uniphos Hosue, 11Th Road Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road C.D. Marg, Khar (W), Mumbai Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aaacu3440P Appellant Respondent

…d. 4.2 Per contra, the learned A.R. for the assessee supported the findings of the learned CIT(A) on this issue. It is submitted that the learned CIT(A) had rightly followed the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of APAR Industries Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 411 (Bom) to hold that interest under section 244A of the Act is allowable on the refundable taxes arrived at after giving credit of brought forward MAT from the gross demand. The learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that in view of the above, Revenue’s ground is liable to be dismissed. 4.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and car…