CIT v. Balkrishna Industries Ltd.

88 Taxmann.com 273Supreme Court of India2017#5604 most cited

What is CIT v. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. authority for?

When an assessee discharges the present value of a future obligation, it does not constitute a 'benefit' accruing to the assessee, thus Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act is not applicable.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. · CIT vs. Sulzer India Ltd. · Section 41(1) · benefit · future liability · present value · discharge of liability · Supreme Court

Also reported as

300 CTR 209

Sections most often in play

Section 80IASection 40(a)(ii)Section 43BSection 143(3)Section 2(42A)Section 244ASection 28(iv)Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)(a)section 38section 94section 80hsection 43(1)section 80hhcsection 80hhadditional depreciationsection 32(1)(iia)block of assetssection 41(1)initial assessment year

Judgments citing CIT v. Balkrishna Industries Ltd.

Grasim Industries Ltd ( Corporate Finance Division), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

ITA 3762/MUM/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kishor Dhule
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 43B

…as since been affirmed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court [(2014) 369 ITR 717 (Bombay), 05/12/2014] and thereafter, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax- 6, Mum. vs. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. [(2018] 252 Taxman 375 (SC)/(2018) 300 CTR 209 (SC), 21/11/2017]. 21.5. Further, on perusal of the order passed by the CIT(A) we find that it was contended by the Assessee before the CIT(A) that the sales tax collected from customers under deferral scheme was treated as income of the assessee, and deduction under Section 43B of the Act was allowed on conversion of deferred tax liability into…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

ITA 6589/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(9)Section 80HSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Larsen & Toubro Limited Taxation Department, L&T House, N. M. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001 [PAN: AAACL0140P] …………… Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 2(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Respondent ……………. Mumbai - 400020 Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri J. D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate Shri Madhur Agrawal Shri Fenil Bhatt For the Respondent/Department : Dr. Yogesh Kamat Shri A.K. Ambastha Date Conclusion of hearing : 15.09.2023 Pronouncemen…

Everest Industries Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle- 1, Thane

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 720/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

Everest Industries Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle- 1, Thane

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 719/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

DCIT Circle-1, Thane vs. M/S Everest Industries Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 652/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

DCIT, Circle-1, Thane vs. Everest Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 1424/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

DCIT-Ltu - 2, Mumbai vs. Ambuja Cements Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2958/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA Nos. 1889 and 1241/Mum/2018, 2384, 2958, 3475 and 3843/Mum/2019 Assessment years: 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 1 of 99 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI K BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President), and Sandeep S Karhail (Judicial Member)] ITA No.2384 and 3475/Mum/2019 and 1241/Mum/2018 Assessment years: 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 Ambuja Cement Limited .…………………………Appellant (formerly known as Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.) Elegant Business Park, MIDC Cross Road B, Andheri (E) Mumbai 400 059 [PAN: AAACG0569P] Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Large Tax Payer Unit, Mumbai ……………...………

DCIT (Ltu) 1, Mumbai vs. Ambuja Cements Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is thus dismissed

ITA 3307/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2008-09
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA Nos.2968/Mum/2015 & 1665/Mum/2019 ITA Nos. 3307/Mum/2015 & 2428/Mum/2019 Assessment years: 2008-09 and 2009-10 Page 1 of 51 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI K BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President), and Sandeep S Karhail (Judicial Member)] ITA Nos.2968/Mum/2015 and 1665/Mum/2019 Assessment years: 2008-09 and 2009-10 Ambuja Cement Limited .…………………………Appellant (formerly known as Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.) Elegant Business Park, MIDC Cross Road B, Andheri (E) Mumbai 400 059 [PAN: AAACG0569P] Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Large Tax Payer Unit, Mumbai ……………...…………Respondent ITA…

Ambuja Cements Ltd ( Formerly Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is thus dismissed

ITA 2428/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2006-07
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA Nos.2968/Mum/2015 & 1665/Mum/2019 ITA Nos. 3307/Mum/2015 & 2428/Mum/2019 Assessment years: 2008-09 and 2009-10 Page 1 of 51 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI K BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President), and Sandeep S Karhail (Judicial Member)] ITA Nos.2968/Mum/2015 and 1665/Mum/2019 Assessment years: 2008-09 and 2009-10 Ambuja Cement Limited .…………………………Appellant (formerly known as Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.) Elegant Business Park, MIDC Cross Road B, Andheri (E) Mumbai 400 059 [PAN: AAACG0569P] Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Large Tax Payer Unit, Mumbai ……………...…………Respondent ITA…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6908/MUM/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A No.6908/Mum/2012 - A.Y. 2001-02 I.T.A No.2117/Mum/2013 - A.Y. 2002-03 Larsen & Toubro Limited vs Deputy Commissioner of Income- Taxation Department, L&T tax, Range-2(2), Mumbai House N.M. Marg, Ballard Estate Mumbai-400 001 PAN : AAACL0140P APPELLANT RESPONDENT I.T.A No.6878 /Mum/2012 - A.Y. 2001-02 I.T.A No.2284/Mum/2013 - A.Y. 2002-03 Deputy Commissioner of vs Larsen & Toubro Limited Income-tax, Range-2(2), Taxation Department, L&T House Mumbai N.M. Mar…

Principal Commiissioner of Income Tax Kolkata IV vs. M/S Philips Electronics India Ltd

The appeal is dismissed and the substantial

ITAT/148/2017HC Calcutta15 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260A

…OD-5 ORDER SHEET IA NO. GA/2/2017 (Old No:GA/1308/2017) ITAT/148/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOLKATA IV Vs M/S PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM And The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 15TH DECEMBER, 2021 Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. Mr. A. Ganguly, Adv. …For the Appellant Mr. J. P. Khitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Mr. A. K. Dey, Adv. …For the Respondent The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 26…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Guwahati vs. Fortune Vanijya Private Limited, Guwahati

In the result both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objections of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 21/GTY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…1 I.T.A. No.21/Gau/2021 & CO No.1/Gau/2021 Fortune Vanijya Private Limited Assessment Year: 2011-12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, “VIRTUAL HEARING” AT KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’ble V.P (KZ) & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No.21/Gau/2021 Assessment Year: 2011-12 ACIT, Circle-2, Guwahati Vs. Fortune Vanijya Private Limited S.J. Road, Athgaon, Guwahati-781001. [PAN:AABCF0295Q] Appellant Respondent CO No.1/Gau/2021 (In I.T.A. No.21/Gau/2021) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Fortune Vanijya Private Limited Vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Guwahati S.J. Road Athgaon, Guwahati-781001. [PAN:AABCF029…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. Pr.CIT, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4/JPR/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 04/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Cement Limited, Cuke Pr.Cit, Vs. Bangur Nagar, Post Box No. 33, Udaipur. Beawar. Pan No.: Aaccs 8796 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Dilip Desai (Ca) Shri Vijay Shah (Ca) Shri Mohit Choudhary (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pcit, Udaipur Dated 03.02.2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – Udaipur, (Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Pr. Cit) Was Not Justified In Initiating Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Since The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Desai (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…subsidy 1.0 Above two receipts are held to be capital in nature by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Shree Balaji Alloys (CA No. 10061 of 2011 dated 19- 04-2016) [Excise duty exemption] and CIT -vs.- Balkrishna Industries Ltd. (2018) 300 CTR 209 (SC) [Deferred subsidy] 2.0 Since the issue is already settled by the Apex Court, proceedings u/s 263 on the above two issues are not warranted and CIT therefore, grossly erred in directing the AO to re-examine the same. Furthermore, the above issues are present year on year and department since inception has allowed the claim of the appellant f…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3076/MUM/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2020AY 2000-01
For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Harit CIT, DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 37Section 40A(9)Section 42Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAMLAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 3076/Mum/2012 2000-01 M/s Larsen ACIT, &Tourbro Ltd., Range 2(2) Taxation Rm No. 577, 5th Department, L&T Floor, House, N.M. Marg, AayakarBhgavan, Bal; lard estate MK Marg, Mumbai. 2 3573/Mum/2012 2000-01 M/s Larsen ACIT, &Tourbro Ltd., Range 2(2) Taxation Rm No. 577, 5th Department, L&T Floor, House, N.M. Marg, AayakarBhgavan, Bal; lard estate MK Marg, Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACL0104P अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 9, Pune vs. M/S. Lear Automotive India Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1788/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ali AsgarFor Respondent: Shri N. Ashok Babu
Section 28Section 41(1)

…. The ld. AR further pointed that the decision rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sulzer India Ltd. (supra) was affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. reported as 300 CTR 209. 4. On the other had Shri N. Ashok Babu representing the Department vehemently defended the assessment order. 5. Both sides heard. Orders of authorities below perused. The solitary issue raised in the appeal by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is holding the difference of Rs.29,78,35,632/- on prepayment on Sa…

Cable Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7369/MUM/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla & Nishit KhatriFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson
Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member ITA No.7417/Mum/2010 & 7369/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2000-01 Cable Corporation of India Limited DCIT, Circle-2(1) 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan Laxmi Building,6 Vs. ShoorjiVallabhdas Marg M.K.Road Ballard Estate Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 PAN: AAACC2936J (Assessee) (Revenue) Revenue By : Shri Awungshi Gimson Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla & Nishit Khatri Date of Hearing :05.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2019 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Membe…

Asst CIT (Ltu) -1, Mumbai vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1776/MUM/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande, D.R
Section 40A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1776 & 1777/M/2017 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Asst. Commissioner of M/s. Johnson & Johnson Income Tax, Ltd., (Large Taxpayer Unit)-1, 501, Arena Space, World Trade Centre, Vs. Off JVLR, Centre 1, 29th Floor, Opp: Majas Bus Depot, Cuffe Parade, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai-400 060 PAN: AAACJ 0866E (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No.242/M/2017 (Arising out of ITA No.1777/M/2017) Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/s. Johnson & Johnson Asst. CIT (LTU)-…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Prima Private Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for A

ITA 998/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 997 & 998/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 41(1)Section 80I

…al in the case of CIT Vs. Sulzer India Ltd. reported (supra.), which has been subsequently affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed copy of Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. reported in 300 CTR 209 (SC) and submitted that there is no case of remission of tax liability in such a matter of discount involved in ‘Sales Tax Deferral Scheme’ and the prepayment of the sales tax to the Government under the said scheme. 10. Further, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee earned similar amount of Rs.67,34,793/- for the assessment year 2004-05 and the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Prima Private Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for A

ITA 997/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 997 & 998/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 41(1)Section 80I

…al in the case of CIT Vs. Sulzer India Ltd. reported (supra.), which has been subsequently affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed copy of Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. reported in 300 CTR 209 (SC) and submitted that there is no case of remission of tax liability in such a matter of discount involved in ‘Sales Tax Deferral Scheme’ and the prepayment of the sales tax to the Government under the said scheme. 10. Further, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee earned similar amount of Rs.67,34,793/- for the assessment year 2004-05 and the…

Asst CIT 10(3) (OSD), Mumbai vs. Colgate Palmolive (I) Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6073/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 6073/Mum/2014 & Cross Objection No.243/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Assistant Commissioner Of Colgate Palmolive (India) Limited Colgate Research Centre Income Tax 10(3) (Osd) बनाम/ Main Street Room No.403,4Th Floor Hiranandani Gardens, Powai Vs. Aaykar Bhavan Mumbai – 400 076 Mumbai – 400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccc-4309-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 2778/Mum/2011 & Cross Objection No.126/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Colgate Palmolive (India) Limited Assistant Commissioner Of Colgate Research Centre Income Tax 10(3) बनाम/ Main Street Room No.451,4Th Floor Hiranandani Gardens, Powai Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 076 Mumbai – 400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccc-4309-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Arvind V. Sonde, Ld. ARFor Respondent: V. Jenardhanan, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 92C

…l Bench) in Sulzer India Limited Vs. DCIT [134 TTJ 385]. Further, the revenue’s appeal on this issue for AY 2003-04 has been dismissed by aforesaid order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Finally, the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT Vs. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. [2017 88 Taxmann.com 273] has approved the view of Hon’ble Bombay High Court on merits rendered in CIT Vs. Sulzer India Ltd. [369 ITR 717]. In view of the admitted position, Ground No. 1 raised in revenue’s appeal stands dismissed. 3.1 Rest of the grounds raised in revenue’s appeal as well as in cross- objections of the assessee are related with certain Transfer P…

CIT v. Balkrishna Industries Ltd. (88 Taxmann.com 273) — Cited in 21 Judgments | BharatTax