How many judgments cite CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd.?

370 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (236 ITR 315), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 143(3), Section 199, Section 250, Section 142(1), Section 143(2).

CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd.

236 ITR 315Supreme Court of India1999#200 most cited

What is CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. authority for?

Interest earned during the pre-commencement period of a project, on advances made to contractors or on unutilized borrowed funds, if inextricably linked to the setting up of the plant, constitutes a capital receipt. Such interest is not taxable as income but can be reduced from the capital work-in-progress.

370

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. · 236 ITR 315 · pre-commencement interest · capital receipt · income from other sources · unutilized borrowed funds · advances to contractors · capital work-in-progress · Section 56 · Section 28 · setting up of plant

Also reported as

102 Taxmann 94

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 199 Section 250 Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 32 Section 194A

Issues it is cited on

section 32(1)section 22 section 57 section 56 section 32 profits and gains of business or profession advance tax section 37(1)revenue expenditure income from other sources section 28 section 37

Judgments citing CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd.

ITO, WD-2(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Kolkata Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue (ITA No

ITA 1362/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1362/Kol/2015& 49/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11& 2011-12) I.T.O Wd-2(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S Kolkata Metro Rail Corpn. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 7Th Floor, Hrbc Bhavan, 4Th& 5Th R/No.21, Kol – 69. Floor, Munshi Prem Chand Sarani, Kolkata – 700 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aadck 5313 J (Appellant) .. (Assessee) Appellantby : Shriarindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit Assesseeby :Shri Vikash Singhal. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: These Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue,Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11,Aredirected Against The Order Passed By The Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1,Kolkata,Which In Turn Arise Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2.Since These Two Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.The Revenue’S Appeal In Ita No.1362/Kol/2015, A.Y 2010-11, Is Taken As The Lead Case. 4.The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue (In Lead Case In Ita No.1362/Kol/2015, A.Y 2010-11) Are As Under:

For Appellant: ShriArindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56

…rned in a period prior to the commencement of business, it was in the nature of a capital receipt, and was required to be set off against pre-operative expenses following the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 315 (SC) and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 167(SC). The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315 (SC), had considered the decision in the case of Challapalli Sugars Ltd vs. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 167 and examined the question of treatment of interest received before commencement of productio…

M/S. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 07.09.2017

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)

…South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 24 (Mad) and Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172 (SC). The assessee, on the other hand, has relied on, inter alia, the decisions in CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) and CIT v. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. [2000] 243 ITR 2 (SC). The question therefore is which of the two sets of decisions is applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case? We are not impressed by the ld. CIT(A)’s reliance on the decisions as to whether the interest income could be said to be derived from the assesse…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Bank Note Paper Mills India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for asst

ITA 1162/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazthe Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(3), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Bank Note Paper Mill India Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, S.R Complex, No.2, Thavarekere Main Road, S.G Palya, Drc Post, Bengaluru. . Respondent Pan – Aaecb3245M Appellant By : Shri B.R Sunil Kumar Singh, Cit Respondent By : Smt. Prathiba, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 7-11-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : -11-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B.R Sunil Kumar Singh, CITFor Respondent: Smt. Prathiba, Advocate

Section 143(3)

…of the matter the ratio laid down by this court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. V CIT (1997) 227 ITR 1721, will not be attracted. The more appropriate decision in the factual situation in the present case is in CIT V Bokaro Steel Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 3152 (SC). The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs". 6.6 In the case of CIT Vs Karnataka Power Corporation ( 2001 ) 247 ITR 268 (SC), the ITA No.1162/B/16 6 Supreme Court following its own decision in the case of Bokaro Steel ( Supra) held that interest receipts and hire charges from contractors are capital receipts which would…

Jsl Ltd., Hisar vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal

ITA 4248/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle- 4(1), Jsl Ltd., New Delhi. O.P. Jindal Marg, Vs. Hisar.

For Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-1”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2006-07 DCIT, Circle- 4(1), JSL Ltd., New Delhi. O.P. Jindal Marg, Vs. Hisar. PAN : AABCJ1969M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 JSL Ltd., ACIT, Central Circle- 6, (Now known as Jindal Stainless New Delhi. Ltd.,), Vs. O.P. Jindal Marg, Hisar. PAN : AABCJ1969M (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by : Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr.DR : Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. Shri Abhishek Agarwal, CA Date of heari…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jsl Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal

ITA 4111/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle- 4(1), Jsl Ltd., New Delhi. O.P. Jindal Marg, Vs. Hisar.

For Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 92C

ITO, WD-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S City Mall Vikash Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 183/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 57

…e to offer its explanation in the matter. In reply, reliance was placed by the assessee on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –v.- Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited [243 ITR 2] and in the case of CIT –vs.- Bokaro Steel Limited [236 ITR 315] to contend that the expenses incurred on account of interest paid to Allahabad Bank on loan for earning the interest income on investment in question was allowable as deduction under section 57(iii) of the Act and, therefore, there was no question of making addition on account of such interest income under the head “income from other sources”. T…

Haridaspur Paradip Railway Company Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 83/CTK/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.83/Ctk/2016 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Haridaspur Paradip Railway Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Company Ltd., Bhubaneswar J/7, Pal Heights, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar-751013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabch 9319 R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.Venugopal Rao, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/10/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, In Appeal Reference No.0268/2015-16, Dated 28.12.2015, Passed U/S.143(3)/250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2. The Only Substantive Ground Raised By The Assessee That The Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Without Considering The Fact That The Ao Was Not Justified In Making The Addition Denying The Interest On Mobilisation Advance Received From The Contractors During The Construction/Project Period Is A Capital Receipt & Is Adjustable Against Pre-Operative Expenses. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Development, Establishment, Financing, Construction, Maintenance & Management Of Haridaspur-Paradeep Railway Linkage

For Appellant: Shri P.Venugopal Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…claimed set of adjusted against pre-operative expenses. Ld. AR relied on the judicial decisions and supported with decision of coordinate bench of the Tribunal. We found the issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR 315 (SC), which has been relied by the Tribunal in case of Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., in ITA No.197/CTK/2016, order dated 7.4.2017, where similar issue was dealt at page 8 para 16 which reads as under :- 4 16. I find that the Assessing Officer in the assessment order has stated that it is found that the assessee company is shown to have earned inte…

Ashtvinayaka Construction, Navi Mumbai vs. JCIT Cir 22(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3883/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Shri T A Khan

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…. In this context, it was held and observed as under: "For the purpose of ascertaining whether income had, in fact, accrued, one has to also see whether there is a real income. It has been also observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315, that no matter by adopting what method the assessee maintains his accounts, it may be either the cash system where entries are made on the basis of actual receipts and actual outgoings or disbursements, or it may be the mercantile system where entries are made on accrual basis, that is to say, accrual of the right to receive payment and the accr…

DCIT Cir 28(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Ashtavinayaka Construction, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3821/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Shri T A Khan

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ntpc- Sail Power Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5717/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 115JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

…s. Further the AO made an addition of Rs. 72,94,614/- on account of net provision of retirement benefits by disallowing the same. In appeal Ld. CIT (A) deleted both these additions by following the decisions reported in CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. (SC) (1999) 236 ITR 315, CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation (SC) [2001] 247 ITR 268, Indian Oil Panipat Power Consortium Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 315 ITR 255 (Del.) and decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in appellant’s own case of NTPC Sail Power Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT in ITA No. 1238/2011 in decision dated 17/07/2012 for the AY 2007-08 on identical i…

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 5065/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Vs. Acit – 2(2), Mumbai Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 2(2), Mumbai Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) Acit – 2(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) Dcit – 2(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Assessee By Shri Arvind Sonde Alongwith Shri Sampat Kabra Revenue By Smt. S.Padmaja

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271Section 80Section 80l

…on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kadernath Jute Manufacturing Company Ltd 82 ITR 362; in the case of Tutcorin Alali Chemicals Ltd in 227 ITR 172; in the case of Godhra Electricity Company in 91 Taxman 91; in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd in 263 ITR 315 and in the case of Sutlet Cotton Mills Ltd in 116 ITR 1 and submitted that it would be totally incorrect to say that an assessee who raises internal invoices would be entitled to benefit of Sec 80IA and an assessee who does not raise internal invoices would not be entitled to such benefit. 13.2. The assessee further submitted that Sec. 80IA(8) it…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Bank Note Paper Mill India (P) Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 692/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoincome-Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(3), Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. Bank Note Paper Mill India Pvt. Ltd. I Floor, Sr Complex, No.2, Tavarakere Main Road, Sg Paly, Drc Post, Bengaluru-560029. … Respondent Pan:Aaecb 3245M & Cross Objn.No.177/Bang/2015 (In Ita No.692/Bang/2015) (Assessment Year: 2011-12) (By The Assessee) ***** Assessee By : Shri S.Parthasarathi, Advocate. Revenue By : Smt.Swapna Das, Jcit(Dr).

For Appellant: Shri S.Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Swapna Das, JCIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ssessee is outside the scrutiny guidelines. However, the CIT(A), while confirming that the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS, deleted the addition placing reliance on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (236 ITR 315)(SC) and CIT vs. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (243 ITR 2)(SC) and CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation (247 ITR 268)(SC). The relevant part of the CIT(A)’s order is extracted below: ITA No.692 & CO 177/Bang/2015 Page 4 of 14 ITA No.692 & CO 177/Bang/2015 Page 5 of 14 ITA No.692 & CO 177/Bang/2015 Page 6 of 14 4. Being aggrieved, the re…

Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2298/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. No 2298/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Coastal Gujarat Power Limited, The Income Tax Officer 34, Sant Tukaram Road, 6(2)(1), फनाभ/ Carnac Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400009 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी की ओय से / Applicant By : Shri Farrokh V Irani प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri M C Omi Ningshen सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of : 15.3.2017 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai, Dated25.2.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The First Ground Raised By The Assessee Is Against Upholding The Order Of Assessing Officer As Regards Interest Income From Securities Deposited With Paschim Gujarat Vij Co.Ltd (Hereinafter Referred To As Pgvcl) For Availing Electricity For The Purposes Of Construction Of Power

For Respondent: Shri M C Omi Ningshen

Section 143(3)

…ther sources” on the ground that the income was incidental to construction of plant and has to be credited in the capital work in progress in view of decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bokaro Steel Ltd ., [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC). The AO vide order sheet entry dated 27.02.2013 asked the assessee as to why the income received from PGVCL was not offered for taxation and also to explain the interest expenses claimed and the nexus between the borrowed funds and the interest earned thereon and whether such expenditure was laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for th…

DCIT Cir 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Universal Chemical & Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2491/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Ramlal Negiआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./2491/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11. िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit-Circle-3(3)(2) M/S. Universal Chemical & Industries Room No.609, 6Th Floor Pvt.Ltd.,507, Raheja Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 214, Nariman Point,Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 020. Pan: Aaacu 0974 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen -Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: S/Shri Kirit S. Sanghvi & Manish R. Reshamwala सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/02/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2017 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 19/01/2015 Of The Cit (A)-8, Mumbai, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Chemicals,Filed Its Return Of Income On 14/10/2010, Declaring Loss Of Rs.11.30 Crores.The Ao Completed The Assessment Under Section 143 (3) Of The Act, On 28/03/2013, Determining Its Income At Rs.(-) 74.46 Lakhs.

For Appellant: S/Shri Kirit S. Sanghvi & Manish R. ReshamwalaFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen -DR

Section 143Section 254(1)Section 43

…आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “एच एच ” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई एच एच खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“H ”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं रामलाल नेगी, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ramlal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./2491/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11. िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" DCIT-Circle-3(3)(2) M/s. Universal Chemical & Industries Room No.609, 6th Floor Pvt.Ltd.,507, Raheja Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 214, Nariman Point,Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 020. PAN…

Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the disallowance made by the AO is directed to be withdrawn

ITA 881/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Section 143(1)

…ld as under: '4. The Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. [1997] 227 ITR 172 was considering investment of borrowed funds prior to commencement of business and held that the interest earned was taxable. In Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315, it was a case of a Government company which during the period of construction of the plant 7 I.T.A. No.881/Mds/2015 had advanced monies to contractors on which it was earning interest, received rent from quarters let out to employees, received hire charges on plant let out to contractors and received royalty on stones removed from the assessee…

M/S Emta Steel & Energy Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - Xvi, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1018/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri N.V. Vasudevan

Section 153A

…I.T.A. No. 1018/KOL./2012 Assessment Year: 2007-2008 Page 1 of 6 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 1018/KOL/ 2012 Assessment Year: 2007-2008 M/s. Emta Steel & Energy Limited,............................................Appellant 5B, Nandulal Basu Sarani, Kolkata-700 071 [PAN: AABCE 5630 J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,.....................................Respondent Central Circle-XVI, Kolkata Appearances by: N o n e, for the assessee Shri R.S. Biswas, CIT, D.R., for the Departme…

Kp Sanghvi Infrastructure P.Ltd( Formelry Knwon As Somnath Project Organizers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(2)2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 6157/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6157/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) K.P. Sanghvi Infrastructures Income Tax Officer – Ward बनाम/ Private Limited, – 5(2)(2), V. (Formerly Known As Somnath 5 Th Floor, Project Organizers Private Aayakar Bhavan, Limited) M.K. Road, 1301, Prasad Chambers, Mumbai 400 020. Opera House, Mumbai – 400 004. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aafcs5184H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Vikash Kumar Agarwal

Section 143(3)

…Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (SC). 2. Alison Singh & Co. v. CIT [2013] 358 ITR 458 (All) HC 3. D.S. Bist & Sons v. CIT [1984] 149 ITR 276 (Del) HC 4. Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd. V. Jain Studios Ltd. [2006] 2 SCC 628 5. CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) It is submitted that no interest has been received or realised by the assessee till date hence it cannot be brought to tax. It is submitted that partnership deed has reversed the entry in the immediately succeeding year on 01-04- 2006 itself . It cannot be an afterthought but as there was an error committed by the partnership firm, the same…

DCIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Swan Energy Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5442/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma() & Shri Amarjeet Singh () Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. J.P. BairagraFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh

Section 143(3)

…appellant or under the head “ Income from other Sources” as held by AO. In the case of Tuticorin Alkaline Chemicals, 227 ITR 172 (SC) the interest earned before commencement of business was held to be income fro other sources. In the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315 (SC) the rent received from contractor for hiring accommodation and other things were held to be capital receipts deductible from cost of construction. Such rent was also received prior to commencement of business. In the case of CIT Vs. Karnal Co-op Sugar Mills 243 ITR 2(SC), interest on money deposited to open letter of credit for purchase of m…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…erest income earned there from also had direct nexus with the said activity, which is to be regarded as derived from the said business. f) Attention, in this regard, is invited to the decision of Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd.: 236 ITR 315, wherein interest receipts from advances made to contractors to facilitate work was set-off against construction charges and thus, reduced the cost of construction. The Court, in the aforesaid facts, held that such receipts being intrinsically connected with construction of assessee's plant, would be capital receipt and not income of assessee fro…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Iffco Chhattisgarh Power Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed

ITA 6483/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2011-12

For Appellant: SH. SURENDER KUMAR, CAFor Respondent: Sh. FR MEENA, SR. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-3”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. : 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER, vs. M/S IFFCO CHHATISGARH POWER LTD. WARD 12(1), NEW DELHI C-1, DISTT. CENTER, SAKET PLACE, ROOM NO. 409-A, NEW DELHI – 110 0017 CR BLDG., NEW DELHI (PAN: AABCI5525Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by : Sh. FR MEENA, SR. DR Assessee by : SH. SURENDER KUMAR, CA Date of Hearing : 22-08-2016 Date of Order : 02-09-2016 O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 07.9.2015 of Ld. CIT(A)-3, New Delhi pertaining to asses…