CIT v. General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd.

155 ITR 78High Court1985#22892 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2017.

Judgments citing CIT v. General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd.

BELA INVESTMENT & FIANANCE CO LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 3702/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S ShahFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 41

…s and passing a very detailed order after considering the submissions and contentions of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) primarily relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd (1985) 155 ITR 78 (Bom) and the decision in the case of Protes Engineers Co.Pvt Ltd V/s CIT (1995) 211 ITR 919 (Bom) by holding that there was a direct nexus with the business of the assessee of these unclaimed balances and therefore covered under the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act as benefit accrued from the business of the assessee. Accordingly, the ld.C…

BELA INVESTMENT & INVESTMENT CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(1)2, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 6776/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S ShahFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 41

…s and passing a very detailed order after considering the submissions and contentions of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) primarily relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd (1985) 155 ITR 78 (Bom) and the decision in the case of Protes Engineers Co.Pvt Ltd V/s CIT (1995) 211 ITR 919 (Bom) by holding that there was a direct nexus with the business of the assessee of these unclaimed balances and therefore covered under the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act as benefit accrued from the business of the assessee. Accordingly, the ld.C…

ITO 8(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BELA INVESTMENT & FINANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 6759/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S ShahFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 41

…s and passing a very detailed order after considering the submissions and contentions of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) primarily relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd (1985) 155 ITR 78 (Bom) and the decision in the case of Protes Engineers Co.Pvt Ltd V/s CIT (1995) 211 ITR 919 (Bom) by holding that there was a direct nexus with the business of the assessee of these unclaimed balances and therefore covered under the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act as benefit accrued from the business of the assessee. Accordingly, the ld.C…

CIT v. General Electrodes and Equipment Ltd. (155 ITR 78) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax