CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd.

280 ITR 525High Court2006#1698 most cited

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

When an assessee has both borrowed funds and sufficient interest-free own funds, and makes interest-free advances, it is presumed that the advances were made from the own funds, and no interest disallowance is made under Section 36(1)(iii) on the borrowed funds.

67

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. · Britannia Industries Ltd. 280 ITR 525 · Section 36(1)(iii) · interest free advances · interest disallowance · mixed fund theory · sufficiency of own funds · borrowed capital · business expediency · Calcutta High Court

Also reported as

83 Taxmann.com 365

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 43B(f)Section 115JBSection 119(2)Section 135

Issues it is cited on

interest free advancesbusiness expediencysection 36(1)(iii)on-moneyadvance taxsearch assessmentsection 43section 37scrutiny assessmentsearch and seizuresection 153acompany

Judgments citing CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd.

M/S TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, DELHI AND KOLKATA

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

ITA 2565/KOL/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Tdk India Private Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata Wbidc Growth Centre, Kulia Aayakar Bhawan, P-7 Kanchrapara Road, Po Ns Chowringhee Square, Sanatorium,Kalyani, Nadia, Vs. 6Th Floor, Roomno.18, Kolkata-741251, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci6950Q Assessee By : Shri Arjit Chakraborthy, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Chakraborthy, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR

…to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in subsequent year. Similar view has been laid down by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2003] 257 ITR 225 (Cal), decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. in Civil Appeal Nos. 5195 of 2011 and 125,9100 & 9101 of 2013. Accordingly, ground no. 6 to 11 are allowed." Similarly, for AY 2014-15 & 2015-16 (consolidated order), the Hon'ble ITAT held as follows: "26. In view of our conclusion that the Ld. TPO and Hon'ble DRP…

SHYAM METALICS AMD ENERGY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1074/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Shyam Metalics & Engery Ltd…...………..............................……….……Appellant 83, Trinity Tower, 7Th Floor, Topsia, Kol-700046, [Pan: Aahcs5842A] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 15, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.04.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

Section 250Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shyam Metalics And Engery Ltd…...………..............................……….……Appellant 83, Trinity Tower, 7th Floor, Topsia, Kol-700046, [PAN: AAHCS5842A] vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Praveen Kishore, DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : July 23,…

UNIVERSAL CABLES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 53/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'डी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री दुव्वुरु आरएल रेड्डी, उपाध्यक्ष (कोलकाता क्षेत्र) एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT (KZ) & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 53/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Universal Cables Limited A.C.I.T., Circle-6(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACU3547P Appearances: Assessee represented by : Akkal Dudhewala, FCA. Department represented by : Sailen Samadder, Sr. D.R. Date of concluding the hearing : 09-Apr-2025 Date of p…

DCIT CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI vs. MAWANA SUGAR LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed as above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as above

ITA 5984/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…Woolcombers of India Ltd. 134 ITR 219 227 (Cal) M/s. Mawana Sugar Ltd. (ii) Alkali and Chemical Corporation of India Ltd. 161 ITR 820 (Cal) (iii) Hotel Savera 239 ITR 795 799-800 (Mad) (iv) Radico Khaitan Ltd. 274 ITR 354 (All) (v) Britannia Industries Ltd. 280 ITR 525 (Cal) (vi) Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (vii) East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. 224 ITR 627 (SC) (viii) Munjal Sales Corporation 298 ITR 298 (SC) (ix) South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 5.3 The Ld. AR contended that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. (supra), Munjal Sales C…

SARBINDER SINGH BINDRA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-47(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7591/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalsarbinder Singh Bindra Asst. Cit, 362, 2Nd Floor, Circle-47(1), Naya Katra, Chandni Vs. Delhi. Chowk, Delhi-110006. Pan-Aaepb2783P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 154

…227 (Cal). (ii) Alkali and Chemical Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT 161 ITR 820 (Cal). (iii) CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 @799-800 (Mad) (iv) CIT v. Radico Khaitan Ltd. (2005) 274 ITR 354 @ 365-366 (All) (v) CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. (2006) 280 ITR 525 @ 532-534 (Cal) In CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340, Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that where the investments were out of mixed funds and interest free funds were sufficient to meet the investments, a presumption would arise that investments were out of interest free funds. Hon’ble Supreme Court in East India Phar…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SUBLIME AGRO LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1358/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

…of the Audited Accounts of the assessee for the subject AY is attached herewith as Annexure 8. In this connection, the Company wishes to place reliance on the judicial pronouncement of the Hon’ble Kolkata High Courtin case of CIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd [280 ITR 525 (Cal)]. In the facts of this case, the assessee advanced interest-free loan to a firm owned by relatives of a director. On the other hand, the assessee had also availed loan on which it paid interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The Assessing Officer (‘AO’) disallowed the interest paid by the assessee on the loan, on the basis that the borrowed…

M/S TDK INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. -11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 203/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…Therefore, following the said decision, we hold that the department cannot be allowed to take a different view in the subsequent years. Similar view has been laid down by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2003] 257 ITR 225 (Cal) , decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. in Civil Appeal Nos. 5195 of 2011 and 125,9100 & 9101 of 2013. Accordingly, ground no. 6 to 11 are allowed. 8. Issue raised in ground no. 14 and 15 is against the transfer pricing adjustment made in relation to sales margin thereby TPO making in addition of Rs. 2…

ORIENT PAPER & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1488/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 1488/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Orient Paper & Industries Limited,…..……Appellant 13th Floor, Birla Building, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, BBD Bag, Kolkata-700001 [PAN:AAACO3279J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,……Respondent Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances by: Shri Rakesh Jhunjhunwala, FCA, Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA and Ms. Vidhi Lexlia, AR, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Prave…

ACIT CENTRAL-2 BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. M/S M AHUJA PROJECT ( INDIA) P LTD, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 69/IND/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 36(1)(iii)

…jal Sales Corpn. v. CIT [2008] 298 ITR 298/168 Taxman 43 (SC); (c), CIT V. Radico Khaitan Ltd. [2005] 274 ITR 354/142 Taxman 681 (All); (d), CIT v. Dalmia Cement (P.) Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 377/121 Taxman 706 (Delhi); (e), CIT V. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2006] 280 ITR 525/ [2005] 148 Taxman 654 (Cal.) and (f) CIT v. Motor Sales Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 123 (All.), held as under:- "16. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court and other judgments referred supra, in our view, the assessee admittedly had its own funds, as referred to earlier, and admittedly such funds/reserves being substantially highe…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-II, BHOPAL vs. M/S. M. AHUJA PROJECT (INDIA) PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 68/IND/2022[20214-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 36(1)(iii)

…jal Sales Corpn. v. CIT [2008] 298 ITR 298/168 Taxman 43 (SC); (c), CIT V. Radico Khaitan Ltd. [2005] 274 ITR 354/142 Taxman 681 (All); (d), CIT v. Dalmia Cement (P.) Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 377/121 Taxman 706 (Delhi); (e), CIT V. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2006] 280 ITR 525/ [2005] 148 Taxman 654 (Cal.) and (f) CIT v. Motor Sales Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 123 (All.), held as under:- "16. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court and other judgments referred supra, in our view, the assessee admittedly had its own funds, as referred to earlier, and admittedly such funds/reserves being substantially highe…

M/S. M. AHUJA PROJECT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-II, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 49/IND/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 36(1)(iii)

…jal Sales Corpn. v. CIT [2008] 298 ITR 298/168 Taxman 43 (SC); (c), CIT V. Radico Khaitan Ltd. [2005] 274 ITR 354/142 Taxman 681 (All); (d), CIT v. Dalmia Cement (P.) Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 377/121 Taxman 706 (Delhi); (e), CIT V. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2006] 280 ITR 525/ [2005] 148 Taxman 654 (Cal.) and (f) CIT v. Motor Sales Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 123 (All.), held as under:- "16. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court and other judgments referred supra, in our view, the assessee admittedly had its own funds, as referred to earlier, and admittedly such funds/reserves being substantially highe…

M/S. M. AHUJA PROJECT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-II, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 48/IND/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 36(1)(iii)

…jal Sales Corpn. v. CIT [2008] 298 ITR 298/168 Taxman 43 (SC); (c), CIT V. Radico Khaitan Ltd. [2005] 274 ITR 354/142 Taxman 681 (All); (d), CIT v. Dalmia Cement (P.) Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 377/121 Taxman 706 (Delhi); (e), CIT V. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2006] 280 ITR 525/ [2005] 148 Taxman 654 (Cal.) and (f) CIT v. Motor Sales Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 123 (All.), held as under:- "16. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court and other judgments referred supra, in our view, the assessee admittedly had its own funds, as referred to earlier, and admittedly such funds/reserves being substantially highe…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S. LIFESTYLE INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed and revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 93/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd., 77, Town Centre, The Deputy Building No. 3, Commissioner Of West Wing, Income Tax, Off Hal Airport Road, Circle – 4(1)(1), Yamlur, Vs. Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 037. Pan: Aaacl2937J Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2013-14 (By Revenue)

Section 2Section 37Section 43(6)(c)Section 50B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “A” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SMT BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s. Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd., 77, Town Centre, The Deputy Building No. 3, Commissioner of West Wing, Income Tax, Off HAL Airport Road, Circle – 4(1)(1), Yamlur, Vs. Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 037. PAN: AAACL2937J APPELLANT RESPONDENT & Assessment Year : 2013-14 (By Revenue) : Shri K.R. Vasudevan & Assessee by Shri Ankur Pai, Advocates : Shri Binod Kumar Singh, CIT Revenue by DR Date of Hearing : 23-08-2022 Date of Pr…

GEETANJALI HOTELS & PROMOTERS PVT LTD,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 299/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…(b) Munjal Sales Corporation v/s CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) ; (c) CIT V/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. (2005) 274 ITR 354; (d) CIT v/s Dalmia Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. 377; (e) CIT v/s Britannia Industries Ltd. (2006) 280 ITR 525; and (f) CIT v/s Motors Sales Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 123 (Allahabad), held as under:- x---------------x----------------x----------------x-------------------x---------x 14. Therefore, the finding reached by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact based on the appreciation of the evidence, and we find no perversity or infirmity in the order impu…

GEETANJALI HOTELS & PROMOTERS PVT LTD,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 298/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…(b) Munjal Sales Corporation v/s CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) ; (c) CIT V/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. (2005) 274 ITR 354; (d) CIT v/s Dalmia Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. 377; (e) CIT v/s Britannia Industries Ltd. (2006) 280 ITR 525; and (f) CIT v/s Motors Sales Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 123 (Allahabad), held as under:- x---------------x----------------x----------------x-------------------x---------x 14. Therefore, the finding reached by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact based on the appreciation of the evidence, and we find no perversity or infirmity in the order impu…

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,KOTA vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the Grounds No

ITA 54/JPR/2017[2012-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2012-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…rs Ltd. V/s CIT (2007) 288 ITR 0001 (SC); (b) Munjal Sales Corporation v/s CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) ; (c) CIT V/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. (2005) 274 ITR 354; (d) CIT v/s Dalmia Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377; (e) CIT v/s Britannia Industries Ltd. (2006) 280 ITR 525; and (f) CIT v/s Motors Sales Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 123 (Allahabad), held as under:- x---------------x----------------x----------------x-------------------x---------x 14. Therefore, the finding reached by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact based on the appreciation of the evidence, and we find no perversity or infirmity in the order impu…

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

ITA 620/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…rs Ltd. V/s CIT (2007) 288 ITR 0001 (SC); (b) Munjal Sales Corporation v/s CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) ; (c) CIT V/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. (2005) 274 ITR 354; (d) CIT v/s Dalmia Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377; (e) CIT v/s Britannia Industries Ltd. (2006) 280 ITR 525; and (f) CIT v/s Motors Sales Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 123 (Allahabad), held as under:- x---------------x----------------x----------------x-------------------x---------x 14. Therefore, the finding reached by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact based on the appreciation of the evidence, and we find no perversity or infirmity in the order impu…

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

ITA 246/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 36(1)(iii)

…rs Ltd. V/s CIT (2007) 288 ITR 0001 (SC); (b) Munjal Sales Corporation v/s CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) ; (c) CIT V/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. (2005) 274 ITR 354; (d) CIT v/s Dalmia Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377; (e) CIT v/s Britannia Industries Ltd. (2006) 280 ITR 525; and (f) CIT v/s Motors Sales Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 123 (Allahabad), held as under:- x---------------x----------------x----------------x-------------------x---------x 14. Therefore, the finding reached by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact based on the appreciation of the evidence, and we find no perversity or infirmity in the order impu…

NALCO WATER INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -2, , PUNE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1892/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Assessment Year:2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Shivaji B. More
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(3)

…ra-group service charge was allowed as deduction by TPO for the assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. In this connection, Ld. Counsel referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd 257 ITR 225, wherein Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that the Department cannot take a contrary view in respect of any issue which has been accepted by the Department for succeeding assessment year based 15 Nalco Water India Ltd. A.Y. 2014-15. upon the similar set of facts. Thus, by following the above principle laid down by the Hon'ble Calcutta High C…

M/S LIFESTYLE INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the results appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 2826/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “A” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd., No. 77, Town Centre, The Deputy Commissioner IT(TP)A No. Building No. 3, of Income Tax, 2009-10 2333/Bang/2016 West Wing, Off HAL Circle 11 (5), Airport Road, Yamlur P.O., Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 037. PAN: AAACL2937J M/s. Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant No. 77, Town Centre, Commissioner of Income- ITA No. Building No. 3, tax, 2260/Bang/2016 West W…

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4