CIT v. Dabur India Limited

283 ITR 197High Court2006#9655 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. Dabur India Limited

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), GURGAON vs. OSRAM INDIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2224/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmadcit Vs. Osram India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 2(1), Signature Towers, Gurgaon 11Th Floor, Tower – B, South City – 1, Gurgaon Pan No. Aaaco 0160 A Pin : 122 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajit Jain & Saksham Jain, C.A. Shri Dhruv Seth, Adv. Revenue By Shri Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2022 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.01.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Gurgaon Relating To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :-

Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 92C

…case before the Tribunal in A.Ys. 2005-06 & 2006-07 and Tribunal vide order dated 14.12.2012 has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. He further placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 197 (Delhi) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court while deciding the issue in favour of the assessee has also considered the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu vs. Anandam Viswanathan (supra) which is relied upon by the Learned DR. He therefore submitted that the ground of Revenue be dismissed. 25. We have heard th…

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 3613/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…same as agreements in earlier years which have been held to be contract for sale by the Apex Court and, therefore, the question of not arise. He also relied on the following decisions :- (i) BDA Ltd. vs. ITO, 281 ITR 89 (Bom.). (ii) CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd., 283 ITR 197 (Del.). (iii) Dr. Willmar Sochwade India (P) Ltd., ITA NO.160/2006 (Del. HC). (iv) CIT vs. Reebok India Co., 306 ITR 124 (Del.). (v) CIT vs. Glenmark Pharamceuticals Ltd., 324 ITR 199 (Bom.). (vi) DCIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd. (ITA 3703/D/05). (vii) Whirpool India Limited vs. JCIT, 109 TTJ 994 (Del.). (viii) Hero MotoCorp Ltd. vs. ACIT,…

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 3612/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…same as agreements in earlier years which have been held to be contract for sale by the Apex Court and, therefore, the question of not arise. He also relied on the following decisions :- (i) BDA Ltd. vs. ITO, 281 ITR 89 (Bom.). (ii) CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd., 283 ITR 197 (Del.). (iii) Dr. Willmar Sochwade India (P) Ltd., ITA NO.160/2006 (Del. HC). (iv) CIT vs. Reebok India Co., 306 ITR 124 (Del.). (v) CIT vs. Glenmark Pharamceuticals Ltd., 324 ITR 199 (Bom.). (vi) DCIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd. (ITA 3703/D/05). (vii) Whirpool India Limited vs. JCIT, 109 TTJ 994 (Del.). (viii) Hero MotoCorp Ltd. vs. ACIT,…

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 206/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

…mpugned addition made in all these cases. The learned CIT (A) relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of BDA Ltd. vs. ITO (TDS) (2006) 281 ITR 99 and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision on the case of CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 197. 5. As pointed out by the learned Authorised Representative, this Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the case of M/s Devi Fisheries Ltd., and also in the case of Shri Bommana Ramachandra Rao, wherein this Tribunal has categorically held that the main purpose in buying the packing material was to obtain goods for the purpose of packing…

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 205/VIZ/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

…mpugned addition made in all these cases. The learned CIT (A) relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of BDA Ltd. vs. ITO (TDS) (2006) 281 ITR 99 and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision on the case of CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 197. 5. As pointed out by the learned Authorised Representative, this Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the case of M/s Devi Fisheries Ltd., and also in the case of Shri Bommana Ramachandra Rao, wherein this Tribunal has categorically held that the main purpose in buying the packing material was to obtain goods for the purpose of packing…

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 203/VIZ/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

…mpugned addition made in all these cases. The learned CIT (A) relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of BDA Ltd. vs. ITO (TDS) (2006) 281 ITR 99 and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision on the case of CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 197. 5. As pointed out by the learned Authorised Representative, this Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the case of M/s Devi Fisheries Ltd., and also in the case of Shri Bommana Ramachandra Rao, wherein this Tribunal has categorically held that the main purpose in buying the packing material was to obtain goods for the purpose of packing…

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 202/VIZ/2017[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

…mpugned addition made in all these cases. The learned CIT (A) relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of BDA Ltd. vs. ITO (TDS) (2006) 281 ITR 99 and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision on the case of CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 197. 5. As pointed out by the learned Authorised Representative, this Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the case of M/s Devi Fisheries Ltd., and also in the case of Shri Bommana Ramachandra Rao, wherein this Tribunal has categorically held that the main purpose in buying the packing material was to obtain goods for the purpose of packing…

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 201/VIZ/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

…mpugned addition made in all these cases. The learned CIT (A) relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of BDA Ltd. vs. ITO (TDS) (2006) 281 ITR 99 and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision on the case of CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 197. 5. As pointed out by the learned Authorised Representative, this Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the case of M/s Devi Fisheries Ltd., and also in the case of Shri Bommana Ramachandra Rao, wherein this Tribunal has categorically held that the main purpose in buying the packing material was to obtain goods for the purpose of packing…

I.T.O WD - 7(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S WINSOME BREWERIES LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 622/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Shital C. Das, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

…overed under section 194J. Where there was an agreement for supply of corrugated boxes with labels printed on them, it was held that predominant object underlying the contract was one for sale of goods and not of work contract. [CIT v. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 197 (Del.) 5.2.6 In Balsara Home Products Ltd. v. ITO 94 ITJ 970 (Ahd.) : The issue before Ahemadabad Tribunal was that the applicability or otherwise of Section 194C to purchase of preprinted packing materials like tubes, cartons, corrugated boxes, etc. The Assessing Officer contended that printing according to specifications settled by the assessee…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHALIMAR CHEMICAL WORKS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 892/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrimahavir Singhand Shriwaseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…on several judgments in support of his decision such as Hon’ble ITAT “A” Bench, Kolkata dated 6.8.2010 in the case of ITO vs. S.T. Printing Works, BDA Ltd. Vs. ITO reported in 281 ITR 99(Bom) the Hon’ble Bombay High court, CIT Vs. Dabur India Ltd. reported in 283 ITR 197(Delhi) the Hon’ble Delhi High court etc. Aggrieved, Revenue preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. Before us Ld. DR supported the order of AO and cited the case lawState of Maharashtra v. Sarvodya Printing Press Fine Art (1999) 9 SCC 65 wherein it was held that sup…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. BISLERI INTERNATIONAL P.LTD.

ITA - 153 / 2009HC Delhi26 Mar 2009
Section 194Section 194C

…urce?? . Learned counsel for the Appellant has accepted that so far as the first question is concerned the same stands decided against the Revenue by a decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax ?vs- Dabur India Ltd., [2006] 283 ITR 197. In support of second question submission was that it is wrongly framed and the order of the Tribunal is challenged on the ground that no finding is returned in respect of manufacture of outsourced mineral water even though such a question was specifically framed. However, she could not dispute that even in the case of outsourcing, th…

CIT v. Dabur India Limited (283 ITR 197) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax