CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.

330 ITR 175High Court2011#436 most cited

What is CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. authority for?

Disallowances made under various sections, such as for PF/ESIC contributions, result in an increase in business profits, and these enhanced profits are eligible for deduction under Sections 10A and 10AA. Similarly, gains from foreign exchange fluctuations directly linked to export sales are also eligible for deduction under Section 10A.

207

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. · Section 10A deduction · Section 10AA deduction · business profits · enhanced profits · disallowances · PF ESI contributions · Section 43B · Section 36(1)(va) · foreign exchange fluctuations · export sales · disallowance u/s 14A

Also reported as

194 Taxmann 192

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 10AASection 115JBSection 263Section 127
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 10asection 10aacomputer softwaresection 40(a)(i)section 80iassociated enterprisessection 40(a)associated enterprisesection 10section 40international transactionsection 43

Judgments citing CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.

M/S Course5 Intelligence Pvt. Ltd vs. The Income Tax Officer

Appeals stand disposed of, as indicated above

ITA/389/2014HC Karnataka01 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 10ASection 195Section 2Section 260Section 260ASection 36Section 40

…d against the assessee. 8 Re: Substantial question of law No.2: It is submitted that this question of law has been answered by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gem Plus Jewellary India Ltd. (2011) 330 ITR 175, in favour of the assessee and the same has been accepted by the Board in circular No.36/2017 dated 02.11.2016. Re: Substantial questions of law No.3 & 4: These questions are answered in favour of the assessee by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income - tax, Central-III Vs. HCL Technologies Ltd., (2018) 404 ITR 719…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Cerner Health

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/210/2016HC Karnataka26 May 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 10ASection 195Section 260Section 40

…ed in favour of the assessee by a Bench of this Court in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. HEWLETT PACKARD GLOBAL SOFT LTD.' (2017) 82 TAXMANN.COM 182 (KAR) as well as decision of Bombay High Court in 'CIT Vs. GEMS PLUS JEWELLERY 4 INDIA LIMITED' (2011) 330 ITR 175 (BOMBAY) and the second substantial question of law has been answered in favour of the assessee by the Supreme Court in 'CIT Vs. HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.' (2018) 404 ITR 719 (SC). Learned counsel for the assessee has further submitted that the first substantial question of law has been rendered academic. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel f…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Cerner Healthcare Solutions Pvt. Ltd

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby

ITA/532/2016HC Karnataka26 May 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 195Section 260Section 260A

…When the matter was takenup today, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the substantial question of law has already been answered in favour of the assessee by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT –VS- GEM PLUS JEWELLERY INDIA LTD., (2011) 330 ITR 175 (Bom) as well as the decision of this Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –VS- HEWLETT PACKARD GLOBAL SOFT LTD. reported in (2017) 87 taxmann.com 182 (Karnataka). 3. The aforesaid submission could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue. 4. In view of the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT –vs-…

Atos India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, RG. 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 865/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं. 7592/मुं/2014 ("न. व.2010-11) आअसं. 865/मुं/2016 ("न. व. 2011-12) Atos India Pvt. Ltd., Godrej & Boyce Complex, Plat No 5, Pirojshanagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai 400 079 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaaco 2461J बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-9(1)(2) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1212/मुं/2016 ("न. व. 2011-12) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-14(1)(1), Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs. Atos India Pvt. Ltd., Godrej & Boyce Complex, Plat No 5, Pirojshanagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai 400 079 Pan: Aaaco 2461J ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dhanesh Bafna With Shri Arpit Agarwal Revenue By : Shri Anand Mohan

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna with Shri Arpit AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 143(3)

…ominator. We find that the Hon’ble Jurdisdictional High Court while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue in assessee’s case for assessment year 2003-04 to 2006-07 has relied on the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd., 330 ITR 175(Bom). The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that while computing deduction under section 10A of the Act, the expenditure towards freight and insurance should be excluded from the total turnover, as well as export turnover. The aforesaid judgment has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. HCL Technologies Ltd…

Atos India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 9(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7592/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं. 7592/मुं/2014 ("न. व.2010-11) आअसं. 865/मुं/2016 ("न. व. 2011-12) Atos India Pvt. Ltd., Godrej & Boyce Complex, Plat No 5, Pirojshanagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai 400 079 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaaco 2461J बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-9(1)(2) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1212/मुं/2016 ("न. व. 2011-12) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-14(1)(1), Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs. Atos India Pvt. Ltd., Godrej & Boyce Complex, Plat No 5, Pirojshanagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai 400 079 Pan: Aaaco 2461J ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dhanesh Bafna With Shri Arpit Agarwal Revenue By : Shri Anand Mohan

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna with Shri Arpit AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 143(3)

…ominator. We find that the Hon’ble Jurdisdictional High Court while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue in assessee’s case for assessment year 2003-04 to 2006-07 has relied on the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd., 330 ITR 175(Bom). The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that while computing deduction under section 10A of the Act, the expenditure towards freight and insurance should be excluded from the total turnover, as well as export turnover. The aforesaid judgment has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. HCL Technologies Ltd…

The ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Tata Sonsltd, Mumbai

Appeal stand allowed to that extent

ITA 4041/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2021AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.4041/Mum/2007 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Acit-2(3) M/S. Tata Sons Ltd. बिाम/ Room No.555 Bombay House Aaykar Bhavan 24, Homi Modi Street Vs. Mumbai – 400 020. Fort, Mumbai – 400 001. स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaact-4060-A (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.3664/Mum/2007 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) M/S. Tata Sons Ltd. Acit-2(3) बिाम/ Bombay House Room No.555 24, Homi Modi Street Aaykar Bhavan Vs. Fort, Mumbai – 400 001. Mumbai – 400 020. स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaact-4060-A (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Vissanji -Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Singh-Ld.Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 23/03/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 05/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement Assessment Year 2003-04

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji -Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh-Ld.CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 10BSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 80MSection 90

…hat total turnover for the purpose of formula would be actual sale proceeds excluding foreign exchange debtors as adopted for export turnover. The Ld. AR also referred to the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (2010 330 ITR 175) to support the submissions that total turnover includes export turnover and therefore, the amount of export turnover in numerator could not be different from amount in denominator. Upon careful consideration of subsequent decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Maars Software (supra), we find that Hon’ble Court has distinguished the decision in…

Handy Waterbase India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Company Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 422/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 422/Chny/2020, 672 & 1228/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 2

…u/s.10B of the Act. In this regard, he has relied upon the circular issued by the CBDT in Circular No.37/2016 dated 02.11.2016. The assessee has also relied upon decision of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case CIT vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 175. However, fairly agreed that the ld.CIT(A) 33 I.TA. Nos.672 & 1228/Chny/2018 & 422/Chny/2020 has not adjudicated the issue and hence, the assessee has filed a petition u/s.154 of the Act and said petition is pending for adjudication. 21. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the autho…

Handy Waterbase India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Company Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 672/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 422/Chny/2020, 672 & 1228/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 2

…u/s.10B of the Act. In this regard, he has relied upon the circular issued by the CBDT in Circular No.37/2016 dated 02.11.2016. The assessee has also relied upon decision of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case CIT vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 175. However, fairly agreed that the ld.CIT(A) 33 I.TA. Nos.672 & 1228/Chny/2018 & 422/Chny/2020 has not adjudicated the issue and hence, the assessee has filed a petition u/s.154 of the Act and said petition is pending for adjudication. 21. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the autho…

Handy Waterbase India Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2 (2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 1228/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 422/Chny/2020, 672 & 1228/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 2

…u/s.10B of the Act. In this regard, he has relied upon the circular issued by the CBDT in Circular No.37/2016 dated 02.11.2016. The assessee has also relied upon decision of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case CIT vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 175. However, fairly agreed that the ld.CIT(A) 33 I.TA. Nos.672 & 1228/Chny/2018 & 422/Chny/2020 has not adjudicated the issue and hence, the assessee has filed a petition u/s.154 of the Act and said petition is pending for adjudication. 21. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the autho…

Barclays Global Service Centre Private Limited (Formerly: Barclays Technology Centre India Private Limited), Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 700/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.601/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Section 10ASection 10BSection 194JSection 40Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.601/PUN/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/s. Barclays Technology Centre Pune India Pvt. Ltd., 3rd Floor, Block-C, Panchashil Tech Park, Off Airport Road, Yerawada, Pune 411 006 PAN : AADCB1173D Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.700/PUN/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Barclays Global Service Centre Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Private Limited (earlier known as Pune Barclays Techn…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune vs. M/S. Barclays Technology Centre India Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 601/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.601/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Section 10ASection 10BSection 194JSection 40Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.601/PUN/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/s. Barclays Technology Centre Pune India Pvt. Ltd., 3rd Floor, Block-C, Panchashil Tech Park, Off Airport Road, Yerawada, Pune 411 006 PAN : AADCB1173D Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.700/PUN/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Barclays Global Service Centre Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Private Limited (earlier known as Pune Barclays Techn…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Nit Data Global Delivery Services Pvt. Ltd

ITA/351/2012HC Karnataka12 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10ASection 260Section 260A

…ith regard to fourth substantial question of law, it is pointed out that the same has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by a judgment of High Court of Bombay in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. GEM PLUS JEWELLERY INDIA LTD.', 330 ITR 175. The aforesaid submission also could not be disputed by learned counsel for the revenue. 6. For the reasons assigned in the aforementioned judgments, the substantial question of law framed in this appeal are answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same f…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Nit Data Global Delivery Services Pvt. Ltd

ITA/427/2012HC Karnataka12 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10ASection 260Section 260A

…ith regard to fourth substantial question of law, it is pointed out that the same has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by a judgment of High Court of Bombay in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. GEM PLUS JEWELLERY INDIA LTD.', 330 ITR 175. The aforesaid submission also could not be disputed by learned counsel for the revenue. 6. For the reasons assigned in the aforementioned judgments, the substantial question of law framed in this appeal are answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fa…

M/S. Motif India Infotech Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1645/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1645/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.R
Section 10ASection 10A(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (Convened through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1645/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06) TTEC India Customer बनाम/ Income Tax Officer Ward 4(4), Ahmedabad Solutions Private Limited Vs. (Formerly known as Motif India Infotech Private Limited) Opp L J College, Off S G Highway, Makarba, Ahmedabad - 382210 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCM1005A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Res…

M/S Outsourcepartners International Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 843/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri G Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K R Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…sessee further relied upon the judgment of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Kalbhor Gawade Builders [2013] 31 taxman.com 185/141 ITD 612, the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court held in the case of CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 175/[2010] 194 Taxman 192 and judgments of Hyderabad Bench in the case of Bartronics India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2012] 22 taxman.com 5/52 SOT 188. On the other hand, the ld DR has submitted that the judgment relied upon by the ld AR are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. Further, it was contended that for the purposes of sec. 10…

Bnp Paribas India Solutions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 12(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1906/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Farookh V. IraniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A no.1906/Mum./2015 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) BNP Paribas India Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Unit no.601, Infirnity Building no.4 Off Film City Road, Near Nagari Nivara ……………. Appellant Malad (East), Mumbai 400 097 PAN – AACCB5717E v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–12(1)(2), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Farookh V. Irani Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Singh Date of Hearing – 20.02.2020 Date of Order – 30.06.2020 O R D E R The captioned appeal has been filed b…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kolhapur vs. Vijaykumar Rajaram Shah, Kolhapur

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

ITA 608/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…e for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee is relying upon following decisions. 29. In this connection, reliance is first placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (330 ITR 175),(Refer Page No. 224 – 230 of Paperbook for Case Laws). One of the issues for consideration before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court was: “(b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to grant the exemption under section 10A of the Act on the assessed income, which was en…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolhapur

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

ITA 1247/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…e for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee is relying upon following decisions. 29. In this connection, reliance is first placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (330 ITR 175),(Refer Page No. 224 – 230 of Paperbook for Case Laws). One of the issues for consideration before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court was: “(b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to grant the exemption under section 10A of the Act on the assessed income, which was en…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolhapur

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

ITA 1246/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…e for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee is relying upon following decisions. 29. In this connection, reliance is first placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (330 ITR 175),(Refer Page No. 224 – 230 of Paperbook for Case Laws). One of the issues for consideration before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court was: “(b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to grant the exemption under section 10A of the Act on the assessed income, which was en…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolhapur

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

ITA 1245/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…e for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee is relying upon following decisions. 29. In this connection, reliance is first placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (330 ITR 175),(Refer Page No. 224 – 230 of Paperbook for Case Laws). One of the issues for consideration before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court was: “(b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to grant the exemption under section 10A of the Act on the assessed income, which was en…