CIT v. Hindustan Cconstruction Company

368 ITR 733High Court#14097 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 357,294 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing CIT v. Hindustan Cconstruction Company

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Asst CIT RG 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 147/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C(2)

…)A 1373/Mum/2014 ITA 1926/Mum/2014 ITA 560/Mum/2015 ITA 147/Mum/2016 unit has to be considered as a separate and independent unit. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- a) Canara Workshops -161 ITR 320 (SC); b) Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. -368 ITR 733 (Bom); c) Tridoss laboratories Ltd. -328 ITR 448 (Bom); d) Eskay Knit India Ltd. -ITA No.184 of 2007 (Bom); e) Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd -321 ITR 463 (Del); f) Modi Xerox Ltd [2012] -344 ITR 0411; g) Meera Cotton & Synthetic Mills P Ltd-29 SOT 177(All); h) Jindal Alluminium Ltd [2012] 19 ITR(T) 255 (Bang Trib); i) Nishikant S Shirodkar –ITA…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 560/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C(2)

…)A 1373/Mum/2014 ITA 1926/Mum/2014 ITA 560/Mum/2015 ITA 147/Mum/2016 unit has to be considered as a separate and independent unit. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- a) Canara Workshops -161 ITR 320 (SC); b) Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. -368 ITR 733 (Bom); c) Tridoss laboratories Ltd. -328 ITR 448 (Bom); d) Eskay Knit India Ltd. -ITA No.184 of 2007 (Bom); e) Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd -321 ITR 463 (Del); f) Modi Xerox Ltd [2012] -344 ITR 0411; g) Meera Cotton & Synthetic Mills P Ltd-29 SOT 177(All); h) Jindal Alluminium Ltd [2012] 19 ITR(T) 255 (Bang Trib); i) Nishikant S Shirodkar –ITA…

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Syngenta India Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1926/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C(2)

…)A 1373/Mum/2014 ITA 1926/Mum/2014 ITA 560/Mum/2015 ITA 147/Mum/2016 unit has to be considered as a separate and independent unit. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- a) Canara Workshops -161 ITR 320 (SC); b) Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. -368 ITR 733 (Bom); c) Tridoss laboratories Ltd. -328 ITR 448 (Bom); d) Eskay Knit India Ltd. -ITA No.184 of 2007 (Bom); e) Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd -321 ITR 463 (Del); f) Modi Xerox Ltd [2012] -344 ITR 0411; g) Meera Cotton & Synthetic Mills P Ltd-29 SOT 177(All); h) Jindal Alluminium Ltd [2012] 19 ITR(T) 255 (Bang Trib); i) Nishikant S Shirodkar –ITA…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai vs. Oberoi Reality Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal is dismissed in limine with no order as to cost

ITA 6925/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri R. Murlidhar (AR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 80

…issue raised by Revenue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs J.B. Boda and Company Private Ltd in ITA No. 3224 of 2009 dated 18 October 2010 and the decision of Bombay High Court in CIT Vs Hindustan Cconstruction Company (368 ITR 733). 11. We have considered the rival contention of the parties and gone through the order of authorities below and the decision cited by ld AR of the respective parties. The decision cited by ld DR for revenue in Bajaj Motors Vs CIT (supra) is not binding as the ld AR for the assessee relied on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs J.…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Fives Call Kcp Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 2859/CHNY/2014[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2016AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarअपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A.No.2859/Mds/2014 अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year : 1999-2000 वष" Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Five Cail Kcp Ltd Tax, Vs. Ramakrishna Buildings, Corporate Circle - 2(1), No.2. Dr. P.V. Cherian Crescent, Chennai - 600 034. Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. [Pan: Aaacf 1763G]

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 80Section 80H

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजारी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. पवन कुमार, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A.No.2859/Mds/2014 अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year : 1999-2000 वष" Deputy Commissioner of Income M/s. Five Cail KCP Ltd Tax, Vs. Ramakrishna Buildings, Corporate Circle - 2(1), No.2. Dr. P.V. Cherian Crescent, Chennai - 600 034. Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. [PAN: AAACF 1763G] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appel…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow the actual expenditure incurred during this year on site restoration cost. Accordingly, ground no. 5 is treated as allowed

ITA 649/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 145ASection 80I

…, for the purpose of computing the deduction under section 80IB, each unit has to be considered as a separate and independent unit. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- a) Canara Workshops -161 ITR 320 (SC); b) Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. -368 ITR 733 (Bom); c) Tridoss laboratories Ltd. -328 ITR 448 (Bom); d) Eskay Knit India Ltd. -ITA No.184 of 2007 (Bom); e) Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd -321 ITR 463 (Del); f) Modi Xerox Ltd [2012] -344 ITR 0411; g) Meera Cotton & Synthetic Mills P Ltd-29 SOT 177(All); h) Jindal Alluminium Ltd [2012] 19 ITR(T) 255 (Bang Trib); i) Nishikant S Shirodkar –ITA…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT 1(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow the actual expenditure incurred during this year on site restoration cost. Accordingly, ground no. 5 is treated as allowed

ITA 8534/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 145ASection 80I

…, for the purpose of computing the deduction under section 80IB, each unit has to be considered as a separate and independent unit. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- a) Canara Workshops -161 ITR 320 (SC); b) Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. -368 ITR 733 (Bom); c) Tridoss laboratories Ltd. -328 ITR 448 (Bom); d) Eskay Knit India Ltd. -ITA No.184 of 2007 (Bom); e) Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd -321 ITR 463 (Del); f) Modi Xerox Ltd [2012] -344 ITR 0411; g) Meera Cotton & Synthetic Mills P Ltd-29 SOT 177(All); h) Jindal Alluminium Ltd [2012] 19 ITR(T) 255 (Bang Trib); i) Nishikant S Shirodkar –ITA…

CIT v. Hindustan Cconstruction Company (368 ITR 733) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax