What is CIT v. Graphite India Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred for the expansion of an existing business is revenue in nature and allowable as a deduction if it does not create a new asset. Accounting entries in books of accounts do not solely determine the allowability of an expenditure for income tax purposes.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Graphite India Ltd.?

52 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Graphite India Ltd. (221 ITR 420), spanning 2012 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Graphite India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 32(1)(iia), Section 32AC, Section 37, Section 40A(9), Section 10B(8), Section 194.

CIT v. Graphite India Ltd. (221 ITR 420)

DCIT., CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD vs. THE SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED, KOTHAGUDEM

In the result, assessee’s appeals for the A

ITA 308/HYD/2024[AY-2020-2]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. Acit, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam & Kothagudem Acit, Circle 13(1) Pan:Aaact8873F Hyderabad & आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singareni Collieries Dy. Cit, Circle 13(1) Company Limited Hyderabad Kothagudem Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Balakrishna, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These 3 Sets Of Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The 3 Separate Orders All Dated 30/01/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21 Respectively. The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Have Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals For 3 A.Ys:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B Balakrishna, CIT (DR)

Section 40A(9)

…ITA Nos 283 284 286 and 300 301 and 308 of 2024 Singareni Collieries Company Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ DB-A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. ACIT, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam and Kothagudem ACIT, Circle 13(1) PAN:AAACT8873F Hyderabad and आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singar…

DCIT., CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD vs. THE SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LTD, KOTHAGUDEM

In the result, assessee’s appeals for the A

ITA 300/HYD/2024[2015--16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. Acit, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam & Kothagudem Acit, Circle 13(1) Pan:Aaact8873F Hyderabad & आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singareni Collieries Dy. Cit, Circle 13(1) Company Limited Hyderabad Kothagudem Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Balakrishna, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These 3 Sets Of Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The 3 Separate Orders All Dated 30/01/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21 Respectively. The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Have Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals For 3 A.Ys:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B Balakrishna, CIT (DR)

Section 40A(9)

…ITA Nos 283 284 286 and 300 301 and 308 of 2024 Singareni Collieries Company Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ DB-A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. ACIT, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam and Kothagudem ACIT, Circle 13(1) PAN:AAACT8873F Hyderabad and आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singar…

SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED,KOTHAGUDEM vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1, KHAMMAM

In the result, assessee’s appeals for the A

ITA 284/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. Acit, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam & Kothagudem Acit, Circle 13(1) Pan:Aaact8873F Hyderabad & आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singareni Collieries Dy. Cit, Circle 13(1) Company Limited Hyderabad Kothagudem Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Balakrishna, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These 3 Sets Of Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The 3 Separate Orders All Dated 30/01/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21 Respectively. The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Have Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals For 3 A.Ys:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B Balakrishna, CIT (DR)

Section 40A(9)

…ITA Nos 283 284 286 and 300 301 and 308 of 2024 Singareni Collieries Company Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ DB-A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. ACIT, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam and Kothagudem ACIT, Circle 13(1) PAN:AAACT8873F Hyderabad and आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singar…

SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED,KOTHAGUDEM vs. ACIT., CIRCLE- 1, KHAMMAM

In the result, assessee’s appeals for the A

ITA 283/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. Acit, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam & Kothagudem Acit, Circle 13(1) Pan:Aaact8873F Hyderabad & आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singareni Collieries Dy. Cit, Circle 13(1) Company Limited Hyderabad Kothagudem Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Balakrishna, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These 3 Sets Of Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The 3 Separate Orders All Dated 30/01/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21 Respectively. The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Have Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals For 3 A.Ys:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B Balakrishna, CIT (DR)

Section 40A(9)

…ITA Nos 283 284 286 and 300 301 and 308 of 2024 Singareni Collieries Company Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ DB-A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. ACIT, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam and Kothagudem ACIT, Circle 13(1) PAN:AAACT8873F Hyderabad and आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singar…

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, LTU 1, CHENNAI, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1835/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1835/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 115JSection 147

….8.2019 c. Binani Cement vs. CIT (ITA 265 of 2009 dated 23.3.2015, Kol HC) d. CIT v Crompton Engineering Co Ltd 242 ITR 317 Mad. :- 5 -: e. Indo Rama Synthetics (1) Ltd 3 f. 33 ITR 18 Del. g. Priya Village RoadshowsLtd 332 ITR 594 Del. h. Graphite India Ltd. 221 ITR 420 Cal. i. Adadyn Technologies P Ltd 162 Taxmann.com 666 Kar. j. (SLP dismissed 300 Taxman. 112 SC) 6. The Ld. AR has further submitted that mere use of word ‘provision’ will not make an entry into an unascertained liability and the expenditure which has already been incurred and amounts paid can never be an unascertained liability nor a provisio…

SIDDHAYU AAURVEDIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/ACIT/ITO/NFAC/// THE ACIT CIRCLE 34(3) (2) , DELHI

In the result this appeal is dismissed with costs

ITA 745/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyalsiddhayu Aayurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd., C/704, Pramukh Plaza, Cardinal Gracious Road, Chakala, Andheri East, Mumbai-400 069. Pan No. Aaacs8335F ..... Appellant Vs. Acit Circle 4(3) (2) Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri K. C. Selvamani, Ld. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 270ASection 271ASection 28Section 37(1)

…d no new asset is created or fructified, the expenditure on such account is revenue in nature and placed reliance on the following decisions in this regard: • Tamilnadu Magnesite Ltd V. ACIT [2018] 407 ITR 543 (Madras HC) • CIT v Graphite India Limited [1996] 221 ITR 420 (Cal HC) • CIT v Tata Robins Fraser Ltd [2012] 253 CTR 227 (Jharkhand HC) • Idea Cellular Ltd v Addl. CIT [2016] 76 taxmann.com 77 (Bom HC) • Binani Cement Ltd v. CIT [2016] 380 ITR 116 (Cal HC) 6.2.14 Thus, based on the above arguments, the Assessee has submitted that the assessee company has advanced loan to subsidiary for carrying out its trad…

TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIAT 2(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 120/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 43BSection 80

…ures as it was incurred for the purpose of expansion in existing line of business We rely on the following judgements: a. Indu Rama Synthetics (D) Ltd-333 ITR 18 (Delhi) b. CIT vs Priya Village Roadshows Ltd 332 ITR 594(Delhi) c. CIT vs Graphite India Limited 221 ITR 420(Cal)" 96. After considering the above submissions, AO rejected the same and disallowed the same with the following observations: In the assessee's case the issue involved is not whether the expenditure incurred is on a new line of business or is it the extension of the same business. The main issue is whether the capital expenditure incurred on…

M/S M/S BAGADIYA BROTHERS PVT.LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,-2(1),RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 37/BIL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 37/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S.Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 35D

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 37/RPR/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) PAN : AABCB8934G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri G.S.Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 09.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of P…

DCIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is thus dismissed

ITA 3307/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the appellant has claimed the said expenses as allowable deduction on the premise that the expenses incurred on the said projects /assets written off in the accounts is an incidental business loss in view of the decision of CIT -vs.- Graphite India Ltd (1996) 221 ITR 420 (Cal), Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Ltd -vs.- CIT (1986) 159 ITR 673 (Cal) and Asiatic Oxygen Limited -vs.- CIT (1991) 190 ITR 328 (Cal.) B. Contention of the A.O 1.0 The AO in the order u/s 143(3) disallowed the claim of the appellant without raising any query on the contention that the same is capital in nature. C. Submission ITA Nos.2968/Mu…

AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is thus dismissed

ITA 2428/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2006-07

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the appellant has claimed the said expenses as allowable deduction on the premise that the expenses incurred on the said projects /assets written off in the accounts is an incidental business loss in view of the decision of CIT -vs.- Graphite India Ltd (1996) 221 ITR 420 (Cal), Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Ltd -vs.- CIT (1986) 159 ITR 673 (Cal) and Asiatic Oxygen Limited -vs.- CIT (1991) 190 ITR 328 (Cal.) B. Contention of the A.O 1.0 The AO in the order u/s 143(3) disallowed the claim of the appellant without raising any query on the contention that the same is capital in nature. C. Submission ITA Nos.2968/Mu…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), RAIPUR vs. MESERS CHHATTISGARH CAPTIVE COAL MINING LIMITED, RAIPUR

ITA 6/RPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 06/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Captive Coal Mining Ltd. J-10, Near Tv Tower, Anupam Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7481N ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri Amit M Jain, Advocate Revenue By :Shri P.K Mishra, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Amit M Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 35D

…deduction of the expenditure incurred towards capital work-in-progress was allowed by the Hon’ble High Court. Also, a similar view had earlier been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Graphite India Ltd., 221 ITR 420 (Cal). 13. Considering the peculiar facts involved in the case of the assessee before us read with the settled position of law, we are of a strong conviction that now when the expenditure claimed as a deduction by the assessee is in the nature of a routine revenue expenditure, and the project of the assessee had been abandoned not on account of…

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4369/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…and 26) (ii). Binani Cement Ltd Vs. CIT [2016] 380 ITR 116 (Calcutta HC) (Refer Pg. No.11 Para Nos. 11 to 13) (iii). CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd [2016] 76 taxmann.com 77 (Bombay HC) (Refer Pg. No. 14, Para Nos. 9 and 10) (iv). CIT Vs. Graphite India Ltd [1996] 221 ITR 420 (Calcutta HC) (Refer Pg. No. 18). 47. Ld. DR relied on the orders of the Authorities below. 25 ITA NO. 6085 & 6357/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 2006-07) ITA.NO. 6963 & 6855/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) ITA.NO. 4369 & 4596/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited 48. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from th…

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6963/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…and 26) (ii). Binani Cement Ltd Vs. CIT [2016] 380 ITR 116 (Calcutta HC) (Refer Pg. No.11 Para Nos. 11 to 13) (iii). CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd [2016] 76 taxmann.com 77 (Bombay HC) (Refer Pg. No. 14, Para Nos. 9 and 10) (iv). CIT Vs. Graphite India Ltd [1996] 221 ITR 420 (Calcutta HC) (Refer Pg. No. 18). 47. Ld. DR relied on the orders of the Authorities below. 25 ITA NO. 6085 & 6357/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 2006-07) ITA.NO. 6963 & 6855/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) ITA.NO. 4369 & 4596/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited 48. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from th…

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6085/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…and 26) (ii). Binani Cement Ltd Vs. CIT [2016] 380 ITR 116 (Calcutta HC) (Refer Pg. No.11 Para Nos. 11 to 13) (iii). CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd [2016] 76 taxmann.com 77 (Bombay HC) (Refer Pg. No. 14, Para Nos. 9 and 10) (iv). CIT Vs. Graphite India Ltd [1996] 221 ITR 420 (Calcutta HC) (Refer Pg. No. 18). 47. Ld. DR relied on the orders of the Authorities below. 25 ITA NO. 6085 & 6357/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 2006-07) ITA.NO. 6963 & 6855/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) ITA.NO. 4369 & 4596/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) M/s. Mafatlal Industries Limited 48. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from th…