CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd.

304 ITR 308Supreme Court of India2008#387 most cited

What is CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

A clarificatory or declaratory amendment to a statutory provision has retrospective effect from the date the original provision came into force, as its purpose is to clarify existing law rather than introduce new law.

229

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. · 304 ITR 308 · Supreme Court · clarificatory amendment retrospective · declaratory statute · retrospective application · statutory interpretation · section 140A · section 115JB · effective date of amendment · tax law amendments

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 271(1)(c)Section 14ASection 10(23G)Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 140a(1)section 215section 207section 2(43)section 262section 209section 2(1)section 208section 210section 115jaasection 140aclarificatory amendment

Judgments citing CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd.

Manu Bali, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 790/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia.Y. : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Kumar Matta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 57

…(SC)/[2009] 315 ITR 460 (SC)/[2009] 222 CTR 213) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Supreme Court confirmed Penalty under section 271 (1 )(c) for wrong adjustment of Unabsorbed Depreciation. 4. CIT Vs Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd (172 Taxman 386 (SC)/[2008] 304 ITR 308 (SC)/[2008] 218 CTR 359) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi Supreme Court held that amendment made in Explanation 4 to section 271(1)(c)(iii) with effect from 1-4-2003 is clarificatory and, therefore, will have retrospective effect 5. CIT vs. Gates Foam & Rubber Co [91 ITR 467] CIT vs India Seafood [105 ITR 708] where Hon'ble Kerala High C…

Akash Enterprise, Thane vs. I.T.O. Ward-4(1), Thane

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4489/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2007-08 M/S Akash Enterprises, Income Tax Officer, Shop No.27/A, Bldg. No.1, Ward-4(1), बनाम/ Akashganga Apts. 02Nd Floor Vs. Shriprastha Complex, Qureshi Mansion, Nallasopara (W), Tal Vasai, Gokhale Road, Dist-Thane-401203 Thane Pan No.Aalfa4071C ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Assessment Year-2007-08 Income Tax Officer, M/S Akash Enterprises, Ward-4(1), Shop No.27/A, Bldg. बनाम/ 02Nd Floor, No.1, Akashganga Apts. Vs. Qureshi Mansion, Shriprastha Complex, Gokhale Road, Nallasopara (W), Tal Thane Vasai, Dist-Thane- 401203 Pan No.Aalfa4071C (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) M/S Akash Enterprises.

Section 147Section 80I

…s, it was argued that since the assessment years are post 01.04.2005, clause (d) of sub-section (10) of Section 80IB of the Act gets attracted. In support of this plea, he referred to the judgment of this Court in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308/172 Taxman 386 and, particularly, the discussion contained in paras 9 and 16 which are reproduced hereunder: "9. In Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 1 SCC 139, it was observed by this Court that the law to be applied in income tax assessments is the law in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by neces…

Megayields, Mumbai vs. DCIT 17(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 2581/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Meghayields D C I T – 17(2) C/O. Prafullkumar Kenia 217, Piramal Chambers 698/1, Kanti Villa Vs. 2Nd Floor, Lalbaug Dr. Dinshaw Master Road Mumbai 400013 Dadar, Mumbai 400014 Pan – Aahfm8449G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dhirandra M. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43(5)Section 73

…against income from business income which is in direct contravention to the mandate of the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act. The AO was of the opinion that in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (SC) 304 ITR 308 even if there was no positive income after additions on account of concealed income, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act could be levied. In that view of the matter, the AO proceeded to levy penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act @100% of tax on income of `52,29,547/- sought to be evaded by the assessee for concealment of income/furnis…

Dhanraj Mills P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD)-II Cen RG-7, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3830/MUM/2009[1987-88]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2017AY 1987-88

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 271(1)(c)Section 273Section 68

…o 3831/Mum/2009 and ITA Nos. 4115 & 4116/Mum/2012 penalty is leviable because income includes deemed income also. Our view find support from the decision in CIT vs Unipol Chemicals Intermediates Ltd. 211 taxman 45 (SC), CIT vs Gold coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and CIT vs RMP Plasto (P.) Ltd. (2009) 184 taxman 372 (SC). Before penalty can be imposed, the entirety of circumstances must reasonably point to the conclusion that the disputed amount represented income and the assessee has consciously concealed as was held in CIT vs Anwar Ali 76 ITR 696 (SC). In view of these facts and the foregoing discu…

ITO, Bhiwadi vs. Sadem India Ltd., Alwar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 196/JPR/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri.R.A. Verma (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 271

…and Engineers Pvt. Ltd. to substantiate its contentions. 4.5 The appellant has placed reliance on the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the case of CIT vs Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. and in the case of Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 304 ITR 308, to substantiate the contention that tax sought to be evaded will mean the tax chargeable not as if it was the total income. Therefore, in the case of the appellant, this condition is not satisfied and thus no penalty is leviable in such circumstances. The appellant has also placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of…

M/S. Ms Shoes East Ltd, New Delhi vs. Assessing Officer, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 116/DEL/2014[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2016AY 1994-95

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 275Section 27I(1)(C)Section 69Section 80HSection 80I

…e, penalty can still be levied.—Saheli Leasing & Industries Ltd. (judgment dt. 8th Aug., 2006 of the Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 1904 of 2005) set aside; CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. (2008) 218 CTR (SC) 359 : (2008) 11 DTR (SC) 185 : (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) followed; CIT vs. Elphinstone Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. (1960) 40 ITR 142 (SC) distinguished. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd., 304 ITR 308 (SC) has observed as under : Explanation 4 to s. 271(1)(c) intended to levy the penalty not only in a case where after addition of concealed income, a l…

M/S. Bharti Airtel Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

ITA 5816/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, SrFor Respondent: Sh. NC Swain, CIT DR (OSD)
Section 201Section 254Section 40

…ingly, the same would, in our respectful submission, have retrospective operation. ee) Your honour's kind attention, in this regard, is invited to the decision of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Limited: 304 ITR 308, wherein Their Lordships, while analyzing the principles regarding retrospective operation of statutes categorically observed, "The presumption against retrospective operation is not applicable to declaratory statutes... In determining, therefore, the nature of the Act, regard must be had to the substance rather than to the form." ff) In view of…

M/S Instrumentarium Corporation Ltd., Kolkata vs. DDIT (It)-1(1), Kolkata

ITA 1549/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: The Special Bench:

…crease losses has always been viewed with the same degree of disdain and apathy, under the law, as an effort to decrease the profits. Learned counsel then referred to Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in the case of CIT Vs Gold Coin Health Food Pvt Ltd [(2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC)] in support of the proposition that when penalty can be levied for overstating the loss, and when Hon’ble Supreme Court has clarified that the expression ‘income’ always included ‘losses, i.e. negative profits, the same principle should apply in the context of losses suffered by the Indian AEs of the assessee inasmuch as notional computation…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 955/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…tuations as the assessee's income. The scheme of the Act as worked out has been noted before." ITA Nos.1349/M/2012 & 955/M/2014 9 M/s. Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd. 5.6.5 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Foods Pvt. Ltd. (304 ITR 308) while reversing the decision of the Division Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Ltd. vs. CIT (289 ITR 83) observed that "A combined reading of the recommendations of the Wanchoo Committee and Circular NO. 204 dated July 24, 1976, makes the position clear that Explanation 4(a) to section 271(1)(c)(iii) intended to levy penalty no…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1349/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…tuations as the assessee's income. The scheme of the Act as worked out has been noted before." ITA Nos.1349/M/2012 & 955/M/2014 9 M/s. Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd. 5.6.5 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Foods Pvt. Ltd. (304 ITR 308) while reversing the decision of the Division Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Ltd. vs. CIT (289 ITR 83) observed that "A combined reading of the recommendations of the Wanchoo Committee and Circular NO. 204 dated July 24, 1976, makes the position clear that Explanation 4(a) to section 271(1)(c)(iii) intended to levy penalty no…

Fiduciary Shares & Stocks P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 321/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainfiduciary Shares & Stock P. Ltd. Acit, Circle 4(2) Unit No. T7B, 5Th Floor, Phoenix Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road House, Block No. 2, Phoenix Mills Vs. Mumbai 400020 Compound, 462, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400013 Pan - Aaacf9759N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 73

…, i.e. from the year in which the Explanation was inserted, the learned A.R. for the assessee referred to/placed reliance on various decisions of the Hon'ble apex Court, inter alia, on CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323), CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (304 ITR 308) and CIT vs. Podar Cement P. Ltd. (226 ITR 625). It was therefore contended by the learned A.R. for the assessee that in view of the amendment made to Explanation to section 73 of the Act, the loss incurred by the assessee on account of trading in shares is not a speculative loss and hence the same can be adjusted against other business income li…

The Commisioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S.Clear Water Technologies

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/391/2014HC Karnataka17 Dec 2015

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs Justice K.S.Mudagal

Section 138Section 313Section 378(4)

…T.Vasanthakumar v. Vijayakumari19 20. R.Vijayan v. Baby20 5 2021 SCC Online SC 201 6 2021 SCC Online SC 788 7 2021 SCC Online Bom. 5162 8 2021 SCC Online SC 325 9 (2018) 1 SCC 560 10 (2015) 9 SCC 622 11 2017 SCC Online Ker 23924 12 (2009) 2 SCC 513 13 (2020) 4 SCC 695 14 (2019) 4 SCC 197 15 (2019) 18 SCC 106 16 (2020) 2 SCC 514 17 (2021) 5 SCC 283 18 (2015) 17 SCC 368 19 (2015) 8 SCC 378 20 (2012) 1 SCC 260 Crl.A.No.391/2014 8 M Submissions of Sri Chandrashekaran, learned Counsel for the respon…

ADIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Fugro Geoteam As, Dehradun

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 5928/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: S/Shri Amit Arora & Suraj Nangia, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Arora, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 3

…lding so, the Courts have held that sometimes legislature specifically mentions about the retrospective operation of an amendment and in some situations such retrospective operations has to be inferred by way of implication. a. CIT v. Gold Coin Health Foods [304 ITR 308 (SC)] (Larger Bench)] b. K.Govindan & Sons v. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 192 (SC) c. CIT v. Shelly P. Products 261 ITR 367 (SC) d. Allied Motors v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677 (SC) e. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Apar Industries Ltd 323 ITR 411 (Bom.) 4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drilling vs. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310 (…

Four Dimensions Securities (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1011/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2005-06 Addl. Commissioner Of M/S Four Dimensions Income Tax, Range-4(1), Securities (India) Ltd. बनाम/ 6Th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Fort, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 94(7)

…onsidered following decisions:- i. Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. vs CIT (1979) 120 ITR 921 (SC) ii. CIT vs Happy Homes Enterprises (2015) 372 ITR 1 (Bom.) iii. CIT vs Brahma Associates 333 ITR 289 (Bom.)(para-5) iv. CIT vs Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) v. CIT vs Shah Sadiq & Sons 166 ITR 102 (SC) (Para-9) vi. CIT vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd. (2014), 367 ITR 466 (SC)(para-9). 8 Four dimensions Securities India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.322 & 790/Mum/2009 & Ors cases It is also noted that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in M/s Krish Enterprises vs ACIT (ITA No.5554…

DCIT -4(1), Mumbai vs. Four Dimension Securities (I) Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 790/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2005-06 Addl. Commissioner Of M/S Four Dimensions Income Tax, Range-4(1), Securities (India) Ltd. बनाम/ 6Th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Fort, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 94(7)

…onsidered following decisions:- i. Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. vs CIT (1979) 120 ITR 921 (SC) ii. CIT vs Happy Homes Enterprises (2015) 372 ITR 1 (Bom.) iii. CIT vs Brahma Associates 333 ITR 289 (Bom.)(para-5) iv. CIT vs Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) v. CIT vs Shah Sadiq & Sons 166 ITR 102 (SC) (Para-9) vi. CIT vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd. (2014), 367 ITR 466 (SC)(para-9). 8 Four dimensions Securities India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.322 & 790/Mum/2009 & Ors cases It is also noted that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in M/s Krish Enterprises vs ACIT (ITA No.5554…

Four Dimensions Securities (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 322/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2005-06 Addl. Commissioner Of M/S Four Dimensions Income Tax, Range-4(1), Securities (India) Ltd. बनाम/ 6Th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Fort, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 29, Bank Street, 1St Floor, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 94(7)

…onsidered following decisions:- i. Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. vs CIT (1979) 120 ITR 921 (SC) ii. CIT vs Happy Homes Enterprises (2015) 372 ITR 1 (Bom.) iii. CIT vs Brahma Associates 333 ITR 289 (Bom.)(para-5) iv. CIT vs Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) v. CIT vs Shah Sadiq & Sons 166 ITR 102 (SC) (Para-9) vi. CIT vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd. (2014), 367 ITR 466 (SC)(para-9). 8 Four dimensions Securities India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.322 & 790/Mum/2009 & Ors cases It is also noted that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in M/s Krish Enterprises vs ACIT (ITA No.5554…

ACIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi vs. T.D.T. Copper Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2411/DEL/2006[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2015AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year: 2000-01 Acit, Circle-16(1), Vs. M/S T.D.T. Copper Ltd, New Delhi 7-Jagriti Enclave, Vikas Marg, Delhi (Pan:Aaact1028N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. K.K. Jaiswal, Dr Respondent By : S/Sh. R.S. Singhvi, Ca & Satyajit, Ca Date Of Hearing: 09.09.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.09.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: This Appeal Arise Out Of The Order Of Hon’Ble High Court Of Delhi In Ita No. 1242 Of 2008, Dated 14Th December, 2009 Whereby The Earlier Order Of This Tribunal Dated 17Th January, 2008 Was Set Aside. The Revenue Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Xix, New Delhi, Dated 21St April, 2006 For The Assessment Year 2000-01. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2000-01 On 29.11.2000, Disclosing A Loss Of Rs. 11,97,57,110/-. Subsequently, The Return Of Income Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment & The Assessment Came To Be Completed Under Section 143(3) Vide

For Appellant: Sh. K.K. Jaiswal, DRFor Respondent: S/sh. R.S. Singhvi, CA & Satyajit, CA
Section 143(3)Section 27(1)(c)Section 271(1)(c)

…that since the decision of Tribunal was based on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. (supra), which had been overruled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court 3 itself in the case of CIT Vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd, 304 ITR 308, remitted the matter back to this Tribunal. Thus, the present matter is before us. 3. Learned Sr. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer imposing penalty. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent assessee company submitted that the penalty was imposed on mere disallowance of claim and therefore, the ratio laid down in the case of Relian…

CIT vs. Central Warehousing Corporation

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/999/2011HC Delhi18 Apr 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 115JSection 234BSection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ITA 999 & 1091 of 2011 Page 1 of 5 $~7 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 18th April, 2012. + ITA 999/2011 + ITA 1091/2011 CIT ..... Appellant Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, sr. standing counsel with Ms. Anshul Sharma, Adv. versus CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION…Respondent Through Mr. M S Syali, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mayank Nagi, Ms. Husnal Syali, Advs. CO…

CIT vs. Central Warehousing Corportion

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 1091 / 2011HC Delhi18 Apr 2012
Section 115JSection 234BSection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ITA 999 & 1091 of 2011 Page 1 of 5 $~7 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 18th April, 2012. + ITA 999/2011 + ITA 1091/2011 CIT ..... Appellant Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, sr. standing counsel with Ms. Anshul Sharma, Adv. versus CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION…Respondent Through Mr. M S Syali, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mayank Nagi, Ms. Husnal Syali, Advs. CO…

CIT vs. Central Warehousing Corporation

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 999 / 2011HC Delhi18 Apr 2012
Section 115JSection 234BSection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ITA 999 & 1091 of 2011 Page 1 of 5 $~7 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 18th April, 2012. + ITA 999/2011 + ITA 1091/2011 CIT ..... Appellant Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, sr. standing counsel with Ms. Anshul Sharma, Adv. versus CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION…Respondent Through Mr. M S Syali, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mayank Nagi, Ms. Husnal Syali, Advs. CO…