CIT v. G S Atwal

254 ITR 592High Court2002#3885 most cited

What is CIT v. G S Atwal authority for?

The extraction or winning of coal is considered 'production' for the purpose of claiming additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v G S Atwal · CIT v G.S.Atwal & Co · coal mining · production · article or thing · additional depreciation · section 32(1)(iia) · winning of coal · extraction of coal

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fundsection 50bsection 43b(f)approved gratuity fundsection 40a(9)section 211wholly and exclusively for businesssection 35dslump salesection 32(1)(ii)domestic companyfull value of consideration

Judgments citing CIT v. G S Atwal

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Integrated Coal Mining Limited, Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 170/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Dcit, Circle-6(1), V/S. M/S Integrated Coal P-7, Chowringhee Mining Ltd., 6, Church Square, Kolkata-69 Lane, 1Ste Floor, Kolakta-700001 [Pan No.Aaaci 5584 L] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Diparun Mukherjee, Aca & ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri Alolk Goenka, Aca 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43B

…oal mining could be construed as production of coal and if so, the assessee is entitled for additional depreciation. We find that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. G.S.Atwal & Co reported in 254 ITR 592 (Cal) wherein it was held as below:- 13. Follolwnig an old and long standing decision given by Chakravarty C.J. in 1959, whch was later approved by the Supreme Court, the Division Beanch ITA No.170/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 DCIT, Cir-6(1), Kol. Vs. M/s Integrated Coal Mining Ltd. Page 13 opined that the winning of coal is not doubt production. At pa…

ACIT, Circle-2, Asansol vs. M/S Eastern Coalfields Limited, Burdwan

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 999/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

…ecision was taken to disallow 20% of the claim for the assessee for the reasons mentioned. 4.3 The ld. Counsel for the assessee relies on a number of case laws and submits that raising/extraction of coal amounts to production. (i) CIT vs. G.S. Atwal and Co. 254 ITR 592 (Cal) (ii) Bla Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT in ITA No.779/Kol/2016 order dated 28.02.2018. The ld. Counsel further submitted that ad hoc disallowance is bad in law and has to be deleted. The ld. Departmental Representatives submitted the disallowance was made as the assessee has not furnished the required particulars before the Assessing Off…

Eastern Coalfilelds Ltd., Burdwan vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Asansol

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 916/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

…ecision was taken to disallow 20% of the claim for the assessee for the reasons mentioned. 4.3 The ld. Counsel for the assessee relies on a number of case laws and submits that raising/extraction of coal amounts to production. (i) CIT vs. G.S. Atwal and Co. 254 ITR 592 (Cal) (ii) Bla Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT in ITA No.779/Kol/2016 order dated 28.02.2018. The ld. Counsel further submitted that ad hoc disallowance is bad in law and has to be deleted. The ld. Departmental Representatives submitted the disallowance was made as the assessee has not furnished the required particulars before the Assessing Off…

DCIT, Cir-2, Asansol vs. M/S Eastern Coalfiels Ltd., Burdwan

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1015/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

…ecision was taken to disallow 20% of the claim for the assessee for the reasons mentioned. 4.3 The ld. Counsel for the assessee relies on a number of case laws and submits that raising/extraction of coal amounts to production. (i) CIT vs. G.S. Atwal and Co. 254 ITR 592 (Cal) (ii) Bla Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT in ITA No.779/Kol/2016 order dated 28.02.2018. The ld. Counsel further submitted that ad hoc disallowance is bad in law and has to be deleted. The ld. Departmental Representatives submitted the disallowance was made as the assessee has not furnished the required particulars before the Assessing Off…

Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Burdwan vs. JCIT, R-2, Asansol

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1010/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

…ecision was taken to disallow 20% of the claim for the assessee for the reasons mentioned. 4.3 The ld. Counsel for the assessee relies on a number of case laws and submits that raising/extraction of coal amounts to production. (i) CIT vs. G.S. Atwal and Co. 254 ITR 592 (Cal) (ii) Bla Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT in ITA No.779/Kol/2016 order dated 28.02.2018. The ld. Counsel further submitted that ad hoc disallowance is bad in law and has to be deleted. The ld. Departmental Representatives submitted the disallowance was made as the assessee has not furnished the required particulars before the Assessing Off…

M/S. Bla Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. PCIT-1, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 779/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2011-12 Bla Industries Pvt.Ltd. V/S. Pr. Cit-1, 84, Maker Chambers Iii, Aayakar Bhawan, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Kolkata 400021 [Pan No.Aabcb 3505 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Robin Maheshwari, Aca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit-Dt ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 08-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28-02--2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Kolkata Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) In M.No.Pr. Cit-1/15- 16/U/S263/Bla Industries/2011-12/12629-31 Dated 23/28.03.2016 For Assessment Year 2011-12. Shri Robin Maheshwari, Ld. Authorized Representative Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri A.K. Tiwari, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 2. In This Assessee’S Appeal The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “1) For That The Order Of The Ld. Cit Passed U/S. 263 Is Bad In Law As Well As In Facts Hence Liable To Be Quashed.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…assessee was entitled for additional depreciation on the plant and machinery used in the business of manufacture / production of article or thing. The assessee in support its claim has relied on the following judgments:- a) CIT vs. G.S. Atwl & Co.(Gua) (2002) 254 ITR 592 (Cal) b) Khalsa Brothers vs. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 185 (Cal) c) CIT vs. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. (11996) 221 ITR 48W(AP) d) CIT vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. (2004) 271 ITR 331 (SC) However, Ld. Pr.CIT was of the view that no necessary enquiry has been conducted by the AO during the course of assessment proceeding, which rendered the order of AO as erroneo…

M/S. Ujjal Transport Agency, Asansol vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle-Xvi, Kolkata

In the result, assessee's CO is partly allowed”

ITA 1601/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1601/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Ujjal Transport Agency, -Vs- Dcit, Central, Circle-Xvi, Kolkata G.T.Road(East), Murgasole Asansol Pan : Aaafu 6732 H] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : A. K. Tibrewal, Fca Amit Agarwal, Adv. For The Respondent : None Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2014 Order

For Appellant: A. K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: None
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 263Section 32(1)(iia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri A.T.Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 1601/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/s Ujjal Transport Agency, -vs- DCIT, Central, Circle-XVI, Kolkata G.T.Road(East), Murgasole Asansol PAN : AAAFU 6732 H] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Appellant : A. K. Tibrewal, FCA Amit Agarwal, Adv. For the Respondent : None Date of Hearing : 11.07.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 14.07.2014 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Central-II ,…

JCIT (OSD), CC-Xx, Kolkata vs. M/S G. S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

ITA 1516/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2009-10

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA Before Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2009-10 JCIT (OSD), Central M/s G.S. Atwal & Co. बनाम Circle-XX, 110, Aayakar (Engg) Pvt. Ltd., 4B Little / V/s. Bhawn, Purva, 5th Floor, Russell Street, Kolkata-71 Shanti Palli, Kolkata-107 [PAN No.AABCG 0816 E] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent C.O. No.144/Kol/2012 (a/o ITA No. 1516/Kol/2012) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s G.S. Atwal & Co. JCIT (OSD), Central बनाम (Engg) Pvt. Ltd., 4B Circle-XX, 110, Aayakar / V/s. Bhawn, Purva, 5th Flo…

D.C.I.T Cir - 6, Kolkata vs. M/S Integrated Coal Mining Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1758/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

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

Section 14ASection 43B

…0% of the actual cost of machinery u/s. 32(1)(iia) of the Act that in case of a new machinery or plant acquire or installed after 31st day of March 2005 and relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. Atwa & Co. Reported in 254 ITR 592(Cal), wherein it held mining extraction or mining of coal to be regarded as production of an article or thing. The assessee also referred to the order of CIT-A in assessee’s own case for the AY 2008-09 wherein he held the mining or extraction of coal is a process of production and allowed additional depreciation on this issue. Considering the sam…

DCIT, Circle-6, Kolkata vs. M/S. Integrated Coal Mining Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1138/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri J.P Khaitan, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the Learned CITA held that coal mining would fall under the phrase production of any article or thing by placing reliance on the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs G.S.Atwal & Co ITA Nos..1146, 1138/Kol/2012-C-AM 22 reported in 254 ITR 592 (Cal) . Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on the following ground:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, ld.CIT(A) erred in law in holding that additional depreciation of rs.75,400/- should be allowed on the basis that coal mining is production of cost.” 6.2. The Learned AR relied on the order of the Learned CITA. In…