CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd.

286 ITR 201High Court2006#5421 most cited

What is CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. authority for?

Interest paid is outside the ambit of Section 194A if it is compensatory and not related to a deposit, debt, or loan.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. · Section 194A · compensatory interest · deposit · debt · loan · TDS

Also reported as

122 Taxmann 516

Sections most often in play

Section 194ASection 194HSection 2(28A)Section 201(1)Section 201(1A)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 2(28a)section 133a(2a)section 80hsection 80hhcsection 80hhsection 194hinterest under section 201(1a)interest on securitiessection 194asection 36(1)(iii)section 57section 201(1a)

Judgments citing CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd.

DCIT(OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. WOCKHARDT LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 2633/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 194ASection 194HSection 2Section 201Section 201(1)Section 222Section 271C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No. 2633/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year : 2015–16) Vs. Wockhardt Ltd, DCIT(OSD)(TDS)-2(3), Wockhardt Towers, 3 rd Floor, MTNL TE Bandra Kurla Building, Cumballa Hill, Complex, PedderRoad, Mumbai-400051. DrGopalraoDeshmukhMarg, Mumbai–400026 PAN/GIR No. AAACW2472M (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee by Shri Piyush Chhajed.AR Revenue by Shri Dr. Kishore Dhule.CIT. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 29.07.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement 05.08.2024 ORDE…

M/S STANDARD FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.7(2), KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 178/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 194ASection 2Section 40

…ated to any deposit/debt/loan, then such a payment is out of the ambit of the provisions of s. 194A.— Nirma Industries Ltd. vs Dy. CIT (2006) 202 CTR (Guj) 198: (2006) 283 ITR 402 (Guj), CIT vs. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. (2006) 205 CTR (Mad) 493: (2006) 286 ITR 201 (Mad) and Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 303 ITR 411 (P&H) relied on. An another interesting feature involved to resolve this controversy is that the Revenue otherwise cannot allow the claim of payment under s. 36(1)(Hi) because as per this section, the deduction is provided in respect of the amount of interest paid in respect…

NHDC LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT - 3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed, Cross appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes and CO is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 40/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninhdc Limited Dcit, 3(1) F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Shyamla Bhopal Vs. Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aabcn 1732G Dcit, 3(1) Nhdc Limited Bhopal F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Vs. Shyamla Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn 1732G

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ts: (i) Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 (P&H); (ii) CIT v. Flender Macneill Gears Ltd. [1984] 150 ITR 83 (Cal); (iii) Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 175 (Orissa); and (iv) CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201 (Mad). 18. There is no reason to depart from the aforesaid view taken consistently by various High Courts, which is in tune with the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Liberty India [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC). We answer this question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 10.3 The Hon’ble High Court has relied upon the judgment…

DCIT 3 (1) , BHOPAL vs. M/S NHDC LTD, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed, Cross appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes and CO is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 316/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninhdc Limited Dcit, 3(1) F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Shyamla Bhopal Vs. Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aabcn 1732G Dcit, 3(1) Nhdc Limited Bhopal F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Vs. Shyamla Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn 1732G

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ts: (i) Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 (P&H); (ii) CIT v. Flender Macneill Gears Ltd. [1984] 150 ITR 83 (Cal); (iii) Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 175 (Orissa); and (iv) CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201 (Mad). 18. There is no reason to depart from the aforesaid view taken consistently by various High Courts, which is in tune with the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Liberty India [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC). We answer this question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 10.3 The Hon’ble High Court has relied upon the judgment…

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. WYETH LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS WYETH LEDERLE LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3508/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepfizer Limited V. Acit- Special Range 23 (Earlier Known As Wyeth Lederle Limited) [Now The Dcit-Circle 7(3)] The Capital, G-Block Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai- 400020 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400012 Pan: Aaacp3334M (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit- Ltu V. M/S. Wyeth Limited 28Th Floor, Centre - 1 (Formerly Known As Wyeth Lederle Ltd) Rbc Mahindra Towers World Trade Centre 4Th Floor, A- Wing Cuffe Parade, Mumbai Dr G.M. Bhosale Road Worli, Mumbai- 400055 Pan: Aaacw2641Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vishal Kalra Department Represented By : Smt. Sujatha Iyangar

Section 43(6)Section 80H

…2010 (A.Y: 2004-05) M/s. Wyeth Limited 90. In support of the above contentions, Ld. AR of the assessee relied on the following case laws: - “Cases wherein it is held that the MODVAT credit is directly derived from the eligible business: - Madras Motors Ltd. (122 Taxmann 516) (Madras High Court) Cases where in the case of sterling Foods was distinguished: - Madras Motors Ltd. (122 Taxmann 516) (Madras High Court) - ACIT vs Galium Equipment (P.) Ltd.: (2001) 79 ITD 41 (Delhi) 91. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that the assessee has received certain sales tax adjustment…

DCIT (TDS)(OSD) - 2(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. WOCKHARDT LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 2131/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit (Tds) (Osd)-2(3), M/S Wockhardt Ltd., Room No. 310, 3Rd Floor, Mtnl Wockhardt Towers, Bandra Building, Cumballa Hill, Vs. Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400026. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaacw 2472 M Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Pranay Gandhi, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 20/12/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 30/12/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Pranay Gandhi, AR
Section 194H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT (TDS) (OSD)-2(3), M/s Wockhardt Ltd., Room No. 310, 3rd floor, MTNL Wockhardt Towers, Bandra Building, Cumballa Hill, Vs. Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400026. Mumbai-400051. PAN No. AAACW 2472 M Appellant Respondent : Assessee by Mr. Pranay Gandhi, AR : Revenue by Mr. Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIT-DR : Date of Hearing 20/12/2022 : Date of pronouncement 30/12/2022 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM The Revenue has preferred this appeal again…

DCIT (TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. WOCKHARDT LIMITED, MUMBAI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2314/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vallabh Gokhale, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, D.R
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 DCIT (TDS)(OSD)-2(3), M/s. Wockhardt Ltd., Room No.310, Wockhardt Towers, 3rd Floor, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, MTNL Building, Mumbai – 400 051 Cumballa Hill, PAN: AAACW2472M Mumbai - 400026 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vallabh Gokhale, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15 . 12 . 2022 Date of Pronouncement : 20 . 12 . 2022 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Mem…

JCIT (OSD) (TDS)-2(3). MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S WOCKHARDT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012–

ITA 894/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…ies Ltd. [2008] 166 Taxman 95 (SLP No. 28). In addition to this precedent, Learned Authorised Representative has also placed reliance on following decisions: Sl. No(s). Decision in the case of... Reported in... 1. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201/122 Taxman 516 (Mad.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 3. CIT v. Jackson Engineers Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P. Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 / 166 Taxman 9 (Punj. & Har.); 6. Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR…

JCIT (OSD) (TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI., MUMBAI. vs. M/S WOCKHARDT LTD , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012–

ITA 893/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…ies Ltd. [2008] 166 Taxman 95 (SLP No. 28). In addition to this precedent, Learned Authorised Representative has also placed reliance on following decisions: Sl. No(s). Decision in the case of... Reported in... 1. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 201/122 Taxman 516 (Mad.); 2. British Bank Middle East v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 251 (Bom.); 3. CIT v. Jackson Engineers Ltd. [2010] 231 CTR 348 (Delhi); 4. CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd. [2010] 228 CTR 356 (Delhi); 5. Phatela Cotgin Industries P. Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 303 ITR 411 / 166 Taxman 9 (Punj. & Har.); 6. Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR…

DCIT (TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. WOCKHARDT LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the grounds (c) raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6803/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6803/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit (Tds)-2(3), M/S Wockhardt Ltd. 6Th Floor, Wockhardt Smt. K. G. Mittal बिधम/ Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Tower, G Block, Bandra Vs. Room No. 718, 7Th Floor, Kurla Complex, Bandra, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 002 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaacw2472M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & C.O. No. 51/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S Wockhardt Ltd. Dcit (Tds)-2(3), 6Th Floor, Wockhardt Smt. K. G. Mittal बिधम/ Tower, G Block, Bandra Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Vs. Room No. 718, 7Th Floor, Kurla Complex, Bandra, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 002 (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anand Mohan, Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Kirit Kamdar, Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 02.11.2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 11.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mohan, DRFor Respondent: Shri Kirit Kamdar, AR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6803/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) DCIT (TDS)-2(3), M/s Wockhardt Ltd. 6th floor, Wockhardt Smt. K. G. Mittal बिधम/ Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Tower, G Block, Bandra Vs. Room No. 718, 7th floor, Kurla Complex, Bandra, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 002 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AAACW2472M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & C.O. No. 51/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/s Wockhardt Ltd. DCIT (TDS)-2(3), 6th floor…

ACIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 466/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 80H

…221 Taxman 30 (All) iii. Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT: 283 ITR 402 (Guj) (SLP dismissed/rejected): CIT v. Madras Motors Ltd: 257 ITR 60 (Mad): 80HH and 80I iv. CIT v. Rane (Madras) Ltd.: 238 ITR 377 (Mad): 80I v. vi. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd.: 286 ITR 201 (Mad): 80HH Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT: 292 ITR 175 (Orissa): 80HH vii. viii. JCIT v. Sidheshwari Paper Udyog Ltd.: 94 ITD 187 (Del. Trib.) (TM): 80IA 145 taxman 22 ix. Joyco India P. Ltd. v. ITO: [2009] 122 TTJ 940 (Del. Trib.): 80IA x. G. S. C. Toughened Glass P. Ltd.: 13 SOT 668 (Del. Trib.) Kirloskar Electrodyne Ltd. v. DCIT: 87 ITD 26…

M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6073/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 80H

…221 Taxman 30 (All) iii. Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT: 283 ITR 402 (Guj) (SLP dismissed/rejected): CIT v. Madras Motors Ltd: 257 ITR 60 (Mad): 80HH and 80I iv. CIT v. Rane (Madras) Ltd.: 238 ITR 377 (Mad): 80I v. vi. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd.: 286 ITR 201 (Mad): 80HH Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT: 292 ITR 175 (Orissa): 80HH vii. viii. JCIT v. Sidheshwari Paper Udyog Ltd.: 94 ITD 187 (Del. Trib.) (TM): 80IA 145 taxman 22 ix. Joyco India P. Ltd. v. ITO: [2009] 122 TTJ 940 (Del. Trib.): 80IA x. G. S. C. Toughened Glass P. Ltd.: 13 SOT 668 (Del. Trib.) Kirloskar Electrodyne Ltd. v. DCIT: 87 ITD 26…

M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6072/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 80H

…221 Taxman 30 (All) iii. Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT: 283 ITR 402 (Guj) (SLP dismissed/rejected): CIT v. Madras Motors Ltd: 257 ITR 60 (Mad): 80HH and 80I iv. CIT v. Rane (Madras) Ltd.: 238 ITR 377 (Mad): 80I v. vi. CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd.: 286 ITR 201 (Mad): 80HH Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. CIT: 292 ITR 175 (Orissa): 80HH vii. viii. JCIT v. Sidheshwari Paper Udyog Ltd.: 94 ITD 187 (Del. Trib.) (TM): 80IA 145 taxman 22 ix. Joyco India P. Ltd. v. ITO: [2009] 122 TTJ 940 (Del. Trib.): 80IA x. G. S. C. Toughened Glass P. Ltd.: 13 SOT 668 (Del. Trib.) Kirloskar Electrodyne Ltd. v. DCIT: 87 ITD 26…

RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORP. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, both set of cross appeals for the respective assessment years are disposed off with above directions

ITA 380/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P C ParwalFor Respondent: Shri Varindar Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…a part of the sale consideration eligible for deduction u/s 80IA. Some of these decisions are as under: - Nirma Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT 283 ITR 402 (Guj) - Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) ltd. vs. CIT 303 ITR 411 (P&H) - CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. 286 ITR 201 (Mad) - CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) - Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 292 ITR 175 (Ori) 4.7 The AO has not allowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA on other income. The other income is mainly in respect of the site plan charges, lease Rajasthan State Industries Development & Investment Corp. Ltd. agreement f…

HARBHAJAN SINGH,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O WD - 1(4),KOLKATA, ASANSOL

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1076/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 269S

…ted to any deposit/debt/loan, then such a payment is out of the ambit of the provisions of s. 194A.—Nirma Industries Ltd. vs Dy. CIT (2006) 202 CTR (Guj) 198 : (2006) 283 ITR 402 (Guj), CIT vs. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. (2006) 205 CTR (Mad) 493 : (2006) 286 ITR 201 (Mad) and Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 303 ITR 411 (P&H) relied on. An another interesting feature involved to resolve this controversy is that the Revenue otherwise cannot allow the claim of payment under s. 36(1)(iii) because as per this section, the deduction is provided in respect of the amount of interest paid in respect…

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-2‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hero MotoCorp Limited, JCIT, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi PAN: AAACH0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Page 2 of 484 New Delhi Vs. Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Hero Moto Corp. D…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PODDAR PIGMENTS LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/347/2010HC Delhi07 Apr 2010

Bench: The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Which, By The Impugned Order, Has Dismissed The Said Appeal. The Tribunal Came To The Conclusion That The Bad Debts Issue Had Already Been Considered In The Original Proceedings Under Section 143(3) And, Therefore, The Same Could Not Be Reopened In Reassessment Proceedings. We Find No Infirmity In The View Taken By The Tribunal On This Aspect Of The Matter.

For Appellant: Ms Sonia Mathur with Mr Sumit Kumar SinghFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 80

…al held that the interest income received on delayed realisation of sale proceeds took the character of sale proceeds and, after placing reliance on the decision of the Madras High court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Indomatsushita Co. Ltd: 286 ITR 201, held that the said interest income could be excluded from the purview of deduction under Section 80 IB of the said Act. We find that this issue of interest received from trade debtors had been considered by this court in the case of CIT v. Advance Detergents Ltd [ITA No.248/2009, decided on 30.11.2009]. This court, in Advance Detergents (s…

C.I.T vs. JACKSON ENGINEERS LTD

Appeal stands disposed of in the

ITA/251/2008HC Delhi23 Dec 2009

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

Section 80I

…xm 303 ITR 411 (P&H) (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Flender Macneil Gears Ltd.,150 ITR 83 (Cal) (iii) Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax 292 ITR 175 (Orissa) (iv) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd., 286 ITR 201 (Mad) 16. There is no reason to depart from the aforesaid view taken consistently by various High Courts, which is in tune with the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Liberty India (supra). We answer this question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 12. However, since it is not clear as to on what account this…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jackson Engineers Ltd.

Appeal stands disposed of in the

ITA-251/2008HC Delhi23 Dec 2009
Section 80I

…xm 303 ITR 411 (P&H) (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Flender Macneil Gears Ltd.,150 ITR 83 (Cal) (iii) Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax 292 ITR 175 (Orissa) (iv) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd., 286 ITR 201 (Mad) 16. There is no reason to depart from the aforesaid view taken consistently by various High Courts, which is in tune with the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Liberty India (supra). We answer this question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 12. However, since it is not clear as to on what account this…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BHARAT RASAYAN LIMITED

ITA - 765 / 2007HC Delhi30 Nov 2009
Section 80

…ax 303 ITR 411 (P&H) - (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Flender Macneil Gears Ltd., 150 ITR 83 (Cal) - (iii) Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax 292 ITR 175 (Orissa) - (iv) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd., 286 ITR 201 (Mad) - 16. There is no reason to depart from the aforesaid view taken consistently by various High Courts, which is in tune with the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in *Liberty India* (supra). We answer this question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. # 17. <u>ITA Nos. 545 of 2006, ITA No. 18 of 2007, ITA No. 765 of 200…

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2