CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers

351 ITR 309High Court2013#1477 most cited

What is CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers authority for?

A subsidy or incentive provided by the government for meeting capital expenditure, to achieve a national objective or public interest, is a capital receipt and thus not liable to income tax. The nature of the subsidy is determined by applying the 'purpose test'.

77

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers · Chaphalkar Brothers Supreme Court affirmed · 351 ITR 309 · subsidy capital receipt · incentive capital nature · taxability of government subsidy · purpose test for subsidy · subsidy for capital expenditure · not liable to tax · section 2(24)(xviii) · income tax capital receipt

Also reported as

33 Taxmann.com 431215 Taxmann 145

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 132Section 139(5)Section 148Section 14A

Issues it is cited on

section 32(1)(i)section 11bsection 2(24)(xviii)section 80lasection 80ib(4)section 80lsection 100section 2(45)initial assessment yearsection 80ia(5)section 80ia(4)(i)convertible foreign exchange

Judgments citing CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers

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

…\IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE 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 09…

A.C.I.T.. Cir.-2, Nagpur vs. M/S Sunvijay Rolling and Enginering Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 224/NAG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Mar 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: Shri A.R. NinaweFor Respondent: Shri K.P. Dewani

…assessee’s appeal, learned CIT(Appeals) referred to several case laws including i) CIT vs. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd., ii) CIT vs. Bougainvillea Multiplex Entertainment Centre (P) Ltd. (2015) 55 txmann.com. 26 (Delhi), and iii) CIT vs. Chaphalkar Brothers 351 ITR 309 (Bom.). Referring to the above, learned CIT(Appeals) concluded as under : “6.6 In all the above cases, the incentives received by the appellant for setting of industry were held to be capital in nature and it has been held that what is important is the purpose of the incentive/subsidy and a mere change in the method of disbursement cannot be lea…

DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Gloster Jute Mills Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 95/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.95/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sital Chandra Das, JCIT

…JCIT(OSD) -vs.- M/s. Keventer Agro Ltd (IT A No. 1663- 1665/KoV2011 dtd. 30-06- 2014) - DCIT - vs.- Ankit India Ltd. (ITA. No. 1330/Kol/2010 dtd. 16-11-2010] - DCIT -vs.- Reliance Industries. (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum)(SB) - CIT -vs.- Chaphalkar Brothers (2013) 351 ITR 309 (Bom) -CIT -vs.- Birla VXL Ltd. (2013) 90 DTR 376 (Guj) (HC) 9. We have given a very careful consideration of the rival submissions. As far as the interest subsidy received by the assessee under TUFS is concerned, we find that in assessee’s own case in A.Y.2006-07 in ITA No.94/Kol/2011 this Tribunal following the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab a…

DCIT, CC-Xxvii, Kolkata vs. M/S Budge Budge Refineries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 390/KOL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A Nos. 388 to 390/Kol/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Budge Budge Refineries Ltd. Central Circle-XXVII, Kolkata. (PAN: AABCB2880M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 02.01.2017 Date of pronouncement: 18.01.2017 For the Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR For the Respondent: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA ORDER Per Bench : The captioned three appeals filed by the Revenue pertaining to Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, are direc…

DCIT, CC-Xxvii, Kolkata vs. M/S Budge Budge Refineries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 389/KOL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A Nos. 388 to 390/Kol/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Budge Budge Refineries Ltd. Central Circle-XXVII, Kolkata. (PAN: AABCB2880M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 02.01.2017 Date of pronouncement: 18.01.2017 For the Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR For the Respondent: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA ORDER Per Bench : The captioned three appeals filed by the Revenue pertaining to Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, are direc…

DCIT, CC-Xxvii, Kolkata vs. M/S Budge Budge Refineries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 388/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A Nos. 388 to 390/Kol/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Budge Budge Refineries Ltd. Central Circle-XXVII, Kolkata. (PAN: AABCB2880M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 02.01.2017 Date of pronouncement: 18.01.2017 For the Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR For the Respondent: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA ORDER Per Bench : The captioned three appeals filed by the Revenue pertaining to Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, are direc…

DCIT 9(2), Mumbai vs. Nikmo Finance P. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 53/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.53/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) D.C.I.T. – 9)2), M/S Nikmo Finance Pvt. बनाम/ 2 Nd Floor,Room No. 218 Ltd., V. Aayakar Bhavan, Business Point, M.K. Road, 349, 8 Th Floor, Mumbai – 400 020. Western Express Highway, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 069. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Aabcn9974G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sachhidanand Dubey
Section 143(3)

…while the Revenue has treated it as revenue receipt in the assessment order passed by the AO. The ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee by following the decision of CIT -1, Kolhapur v. M/s. Chaphalkar Brothers' Pune in ITA No. 1036/1147 of 2010, (2013)351 ITR 309(Bom. HC). 9. We have heard the ld. D.R and perused the material on record. We have observed that the assessee is in the business exhibition of films and is a 100% subsidiary of Growel Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. The assessee has received entertainment tax to the tune of Rs. 2,06,32,715/- during the impugned assessment year which has been retained by…

Svg Fashion Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1217/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. A.K.Kardam
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…at lagged behind in industrial development is to be treated as capital receipt. 8. Ld. A.R. also submitted that similar view was given in following decisions:- DCIT –vs.- Reliance Industries (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum.)(SB); CIT –vs.- Chaphalkar Brothers (2013) 351 ITR 309 (Bom.); CIT –vs.- Birla VXL Ltd. (2013) 90 DTR 376 (Guj.)(HC); Hydro Carbons & Chemicals –vs.- ACIT (ITA No. 1982-86/Kol/09 dated 29.04.2011); Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. –vs.- ACIT (2012) 33 CCH 526 (Del.)(ITAT). ITA Nos.5644/11, ITA No.8565/M/10 & ITA Nos.296&4154/12 13 9. Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the…

Regen Powertech Private Lmited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and Department are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 786/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Anuragh Sahay, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.766/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner M/s. Regen Powertech (P) Ltd. of Income Tax, Vs. Samson Towers, 3rd, 4th & 5th floors, Corporate Circle 5(1) Chennai. 403L, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.786/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2011-12 M/s. Regen Powertech (P) Ltd.…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Regen Powertech (P) Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and Department are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 766/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Anuragh Sahay, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.766/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner M/s. Regen Powertech (P) Ltd. of Income Tax, Vs. Samson Towers, 3rd, 4th & 5th floors, Corporate Circle 5(1) Chennai. 403L, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.786/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2011-12 M/s. Regen Powertech (P) Ltd.…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…assessee by the following orders :- (a) CIT v. National Co-operative Consumer Federation Ltd.: 254 ITR 599 (Del) (b) DCIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd: (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum) (SB) affirmed by the Bombay High Court in 339 ITR 632 (c) CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers: 351 ITR 309 (Mum.) (d) CIT v. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd: 364 ITR 88 (Mum) (e) CIT vs. Sham Lal Bansal in ITA: 472 of 2010 (P&H) (f) CIT v. Birla VXL Ltd.: 215 Taxman 117 (Guj.) (g) DCIT v. Munjal Auto Industries Ltd.: 218 Taxman 135 (Guj.) (h) DCIT v. Inox Leisure Ltd.: 351 ITR 314 (Guj.) (i) CIT v. Samta Chavigarh: ITA No. 144 of 2007 (Raj)/ 222 Taxman 205…

Man Industries India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6698/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6696,6697&6698/Mum/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) M/S. Man Industries India Ltd Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 101, Man House, S.V. Road, Off. Tax-(Ltu), बिधम/ 29Th Floor, Centre No 1, World Pawan Hans, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai-400 056. Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 2675G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistri प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P.Singh Citdr

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Singh CITDR
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…e facts in the instant case before us are identical to the above cases decided by Supreme Court in case of Shree Balaji Alloys (supra), Ponni Sugar & Chemicals Ltd(supra) and by Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Industries (supra), Chaphalkar Brothers 351 ITR 309, Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd., 364 ITR 88, by Gujarat High Court in the case of Inox Leisure ltd. 351 ITR 314. However, the learned Assessing Officer has wrongly held that the facts are different and has erroneously refused to follow these judgements. Following the principle laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemical…

Man Industries India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6697/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6696,6697&6698/Mum/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) M/S. Man Industries India Ltd Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 101, Man House, S.V. Road, Off. Tax-(Ltu), बिधम/ 29Th Floor, Centre No 1, World Pawan Hans, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai-400 056. Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 2675G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistri प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P.Singh Citdr

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Singh CITDR
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…e facts in the instant case before us are identical to the above cases decided by Supreme Court in case of Shree Balaji Alloys (supra), Ponni Sugar & Chemicals Ltd(supra) and by Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Industries (supra), Chaphalkar Brothers 351 ITR 309, Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd., 364 ITR 88, by Gujarat High Court in the case of Inox Leisure ltd. 351 ITR 314. However, the learned Assessing Officer has wrongly held that the facts are different and has erroneously refused to follow these judgements. Following the principle laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemical…

Man Industries India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6696/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6696,6697&6698/Mum/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) M/S. Man Industries India Ltd Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 101, Man House, S.V. Road, Off. Tax-(Ltu), बिधम/ 29Th Floor, Centre No 1, World Pawan Hans, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai-400 056. Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 2675G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistri प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P.Singh Citdr

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Singh CITDR
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…e facts in the instant case before us are identical to the above cases decided by Supreme Court in case of Shree Balaji Alloys (supra), Ponni Sugar & Chemicals Ltd(supra) and by Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Industries (supra), Chaphalkar Brothers 351 ITR 309, Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd., 364 ITR 88, by Gujarat High Court in the case of Inox Leisure ltd. 351 ITR 314. However, the learned Assessing Officer has wrongly held that the facts are different and has erroneously refused to follow these judgements. Following the principle laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemical…

Svg Fashions Ltd ( Formelry Known As Deepak Suitings Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4154/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5644/Mum/2011

For Appellant: Shri Hariom TulsyanFor Respondent: Shri Ranjeesh K. Arvind
Section 143(3)

…that lagged behind in industrial development is to be treated as capital receipt. 8. Ld. A.R. also submitted that similar view was given in following decisions:- DCIT –vs.- Reliance Industries (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum.)(SB); CIT –vs.- Chaphalkar Brothers (2013) 351 ITR 309 (Bom.); CIT –vs.- Birla VXL Ltd. (2013) 90 DTR 376 (Guj.)(HC); Hydro Carbons & Chemicals –vs.- ACIT (ITA No. 1982-86/Kol/09 dated 29.04.2011); Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. –vs.- ACIT (2012) 33 CCH 526 (Del.)(ITAT). 13 ITA Nos.5644/11, ITA No.8565/M/10 & ITA Nos.296&4154/12 9. Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the…

Svg Fashions Ltd (Formelry Knwon As Deepak Suitings Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 296/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5644/Mum/2011

For Appellant: Shri Hariom TulsyanFor Respondent: Shri Ranjeesh K. Arvind
Section 143(3)

…that lagged behind in industrial development is to be treated as capital receipt. 8. Ld. A.R. also submitted that similar view was given in following decisions:- DCIT –vs.- Reliance Industries (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum.)(SB); CIT –vs.- Chaphalkar Brothers (2013) 351 ITR 309 (Bom.); CIT –vs.- Birla VXL Ltd. (2013) 90 DTR 376 (Guj.)(HC); Hydro Carbons & Chemicals –vs.- ACIT (ITA No. 1982-86/Kol/09 dated 29.04.2011); Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. –vs.- ACIT (2012) 33 CCH 526 (Del.)(ITAT). 13 ITA Nos.5644/11, ITA No.8565/M/10 & ITA Nos.296&4154/12 9. Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the…

Svg Fashions Ltd (Formerly Known As Deepak Suitings Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5644/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5644/Mum/2011

For Appellant: Shri Hariom TulsyanFor Respondent: Shri Ranjeesh K. Arvind
Section 143(3)

…that lagged behind in industrial development is to be treated as capital receipt. 8. Ld. A.R. also submitted that similar view was given in following decisions:- DCIT –vs.- Reliance Industries (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum.)(SB); CIT –vs.- Chaphalkar Brothers (2013) 351 ITR 309 (Bom.); CIT –vs.- Birla VXL Ltd. (2013) 90 DTR 376 (Guj.)(HC); Hydro Carbons & Chemicals –vs.- ACIT (ITA No. 1982-86/Kol/09 dated 29.04.2011); Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. –vs.- ACIT (2012) 33 CCH 526 (Del.)(ITAT). 13 ITA Nos.5644/11, ITA No.8565/M/10 & ITA Nos.296&4154/12 9. Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the…