CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd.

396 ITR 696Supreme Court of India2017#8458 most cited

What is CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. authority for?

The process of bottling gas into cylinders through a complex technical process undertaken in plant and machinery amounts to manufacturing or production for the purposes of Section 32AC of the Income Tax Act.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. · 396 ITR 696 · SC · Section 32AC · manufacturing or production · new asset · bottling gas · cylinders · plant and machinery

Judgments citing CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Assam Air Products (P) Ltd, Guwahati

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

ITA 319/GTY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati08 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 154Section 250Section 80I

…) wherein ld. CIT(A) after discussing the manufacturing/production process carried out by the assessee has further, referred to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. Reported in [2017] 396 ITR 696 (SC) and allowed the assessee’s claim made u/s 80IC/80IE of the Act. 10. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Revenue is aggrieved with the finding of ld. CIT(A) allowing the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act for Sivasagar unit and u/s 80IE of the Act for North Lakhimpur and Duliajan units acc…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Assam Air Products (P) Ltd, Guwahati

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

ITA 318/GTY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati08 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 154Section 250Section 80I

…) wherein ld. CIT(A) after discussing the manufacturing/production process carried out by the assessee has further, referred to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. Reported in [2017] 396 ITR 696 (SC) and allowed the assessee’s claim made u/s 80IC/80IE of the Act. 10. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Revenue is aggrieved with the finding of ld. CIT(A) allowing the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act for Sivasagar unit and u/s 80IE of the Act for North Lakhimpur and Duliajan units acc…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Assam Air Products (P) Ltd, Guwahati

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

ITA 240/GTY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati08 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 154Section 250Section 80I

…) wherein ld. CIT(A) after discussing the manufacturing/production process carried out by the assessee has further, referred to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. Reported in [2017] 396 ITR 696 (SC) and allowed the assessee’s claim made u/s 80IC/80IE of the Act. 10. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Revenue is aggrieved with the finding of ld. CIT(A) allowing the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act for Sivasagar unit and u/s 80IE of the Act for North Lakhimpur and Duliajan units acc…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Assam Air Products (P) Ltd, Guwahati

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

ITA 239/GTY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati08 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 154Section 250Section 80I

…) wherein ld. CIT(A) after discussing the manufacturing/production process carried out by the assessee has further, referred to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. Reported in [2017] 396 ITR 696 (SC) and allowed the assessee’s claim made u/s 80IC/80IE of the Act. 10. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Revenue is aggrieved with the finding of ld. CIT(A) allowing the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act for Sivasagar unit and u/s 80IE of the Act for North Lakhimpur and Duliajan units acc…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Assam Air Products (P) Ltd, Guwahati

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

ITA 238/GTY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati08 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 154Section 250Section 80I

…) wherein ld. CIT(A) after discussing the manufacturing/production process carried out by the assessee has further, referred to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. Reported in [2017] 396 ITR 696 (SC) and allowed the assessee’s claim made u/s 80IC/80IE of the Act. 10. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Revenue is aggrieved with the finding of ld. CIT(A) allowing the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act for Sivasagar unit and u/s 80IE of the Act for North Lakhimpur and Duliajan units acc…

M/S Subex Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner of

Appeal is allowed

ITA/42/2017HC Karnataka26 Aug 2022

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,M G UMA

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 260

…above process. If an operation/process renders a commodity or article fit for use for which it is otherwise not fit, the operation/process falls within 12 (2014) 221 Taxmann. 43 Para 210 13 (2017)396 ITR 696 14 (2010)320 ITR 456 (SC) I.T.A No.42/2017 19 the meaning of the word "manufacture". Applying the above test to the facts of the present case, we are of the view that, in the present case, the assesse…

Bharat Prtroleum Corporation Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT Circle-2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for parity of reasons

ITA 1602/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 1602/मुं/2020 ("न. व. 2015-16) आअसं. 1600/मुं/2020 ("न.व. 2017-18) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Taxation Section, 4Th Floor, Bharat Bhavan, 4 & 6 Currimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan: Aaacb-2902-M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -2, Room No.344, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Rahul Raman & B.K. Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/02/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Rahul Raman & B.K. Bagchi
Section 10(34)Section 236Section 263Section 32A

…the gas cylinders are used for refilling, they are deemed to be installed or put to use. 4.4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. reported as 396 ITR 696 (SC) to assert that the process of bottling gas into cylinders by complex technical process undertaken in plant and machinery amounts to production/manufacturing. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the PCIT has taken a very narrow view of the expression ‘manufacturing or production’ and ‘new asset’ used in sub-section(1) of section 3…

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Circlr-2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for parity of reasons

ITA 1600/MUM/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 1602/मुं/2020 ("न. व. 2015-16) आअसं. 1600/मुं/2020 ("न.व. 2017-18) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Taxation Section, 4Th Floor, Bharat Bhavan, 4 & 6 Currimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan: Aaacb-2902-M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -2, Room No.344, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Rahul Raman & B.K. Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/02/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Rahul Raman & B.K. Bagchi
Section 10(34)Section 236Section 263Section 32A

…the gas cylinders are used for refilling, they are deemed to be installed or put to use. 4.4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. reported as 396 ITR 696 (SC) to assert that the process of bottling gas into cylinders by complex technical process undertaken in plant and machinery amounts to production/manufacturing. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the PCIT has taken a very narrow view of the expression ‘manufacturing or production’ and ‘new asset’ used in sub-section(1) of section 3…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4642/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…under: Kores India Limited vs. CCE: 2004 (174) ELT 7 (SC) India Cine Agencies vs. CIT: 308 ITR 98 ITO v. Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd.: 320 ITR 79/ 227 CTR 513 CIT vs Emptee Poly-Yarn (P) Ltd: 320 ITR 665 (SC) CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd.: 396 ITR 696, Puttur Petro Products (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT: 361 ITR 290 Central U.P. Gas Limited vs. DCIT: ITA No.224 of 2014 CIT vs. Gujarat Gas Company Ltd.: ITA No. 60 of 2009 Even the procedure/activity of purification, odorization, de-sulphurication, removing moisture content, regulating temperature and pressure etc., clearly falls within the ambit of “m…

Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT-Ltu Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4454/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…under: Kores India Limited vs. CCE: 2004 (174) ELT 7 (SC) India Cine Agencies vs. CIT: 308 ITR 98 ITO v. Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd.: 320 ITR 79/ 227 CTR 513 CIT vs Emptee Poly-Yarn (P) Ltd: 320 ITR 665 (SC) CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd.: 396 ITR 696, Puttur Petro Products (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT: 361 ITR 290 Central U.P. Gas Limited vs. DCIT: ITA No.224 of 2014 CIT vs. Gujarat Gas Company Ltd.: ITA No. 60 of 2009 Even the procedure/activity of purification, odorization, de-sulphurication, removing moisture content, regulating temperature and pressure etc., clearly falls within the ambit of “m…

M/S. Indagro Foods Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - (OSD) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7342/MUM/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2019AY 2003-2004

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

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, with Ms. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri Chaitnya Anjaria and Sh. Manoj Kumar Singh (Sr.DR’s)
Section 254(1)Section 80HSection 80I

…IT vs. A.B. Ismail (62 STC 394 (SC), CIT vs. Emptee 7 ITA No. 7342 to 7344 Mum 2008-M/s Indagro Foods Ltd. Poly-Yarn (P.) Ltd. [2010 188 TAXMAN 188 (SC), Aspinwall and Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [251 ITR 323 (SC) CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 696 (SC), decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Meat Products of India Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (Vol. 137 page 570 (137 STC 570 (Kerala), decision of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in Associated Capsules (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2011] 197 TAXMAN 84 (Bom.), decision of Chennai Tribunal in ITO vs. Shri Swasan Chemicals (M) P. Ltd. [2008] 300 ITR (AT) 17…

Bg Exploration & Production India Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Dehradun

ITA 6791/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144C

…hat AO is required to decide the claim in view of the provisions contained u/s 32(1)(iia) of the Act in the light of the decision 42 ITA No.6791/Del./2017 rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Courts in CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corp. Ltd. – 396 ITR 696 (SC), HLS India Ltd. – 355 ITR 292 (Del.), CIT vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. – 271 ITR 331 (SC), Aluminum Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Coal Board – AIR 1959 Cal. 222 and CIT vs. Mercantile Construction Co. (1994) 74 taxman 41 (Cal. HC) on merits after providing an opportunity of being heard to the taxpayer. Consequently, ground no.19 is determined in fa…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Shriram Chits

Appeal is allowed

RP/42/2017HC Karnataka16 Jun 2017

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 260

…above process. If an operation/process renders a commodity or article fit for use for which it is otherwise not fit, the operation/process falls within 12 (2014) 221 Taxmann. 43 Para 210 13 (2017)396 ITR 696 14 (2010)320 ITR 456 (SC) I.T.A No.42/2017 19 the meaning of the word "manufacture". Applying the above test to the facts of the present case, we are of the view that, in the present case, the assesse…

CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. (396 ITR 696) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax