CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation

247 ITR 268Supreme Court of India2001#837 most cited

What is CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation authority for?

Income earned during the project construction stage, which has a direct nexus or is inextricably linked to the project's setting up, constitutes a capital receipt not liable to tax and reduces the project cost.

124

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation · 247 ITR 268 · Supreme Court · income during construction · project cost reduction · capital receipt · not taxable · inextricably linked · capital work-in-progress · section 37(1) · section 32(1)(ii) · Bokaro Steel principle

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 3asection 120(4)(b)section 4asection 36(1)(v)section 35esection 10(20)section 61section 46section 10(5)section 40a(7)section 92esection 92ba

Judgments citing CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation

VNG AUTOMOTIVE P. LTD. vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

The appeals are disposed of as allowed

ITA-795/2004HC Delhi10 Apr 2026
For Appellant: Mr. Satyen Sethi & Mr. Arta Trana PandaFor Respondent: Mr Abhishek Maratha, SSC, Mr Apoorv
Section 148

…tion. 16. He submitted that, in Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills (supra), the principle laid down in Bokaro Steel Ltd. (supra) was applied to interest on money deposited to open LC for purchase of machinery and in CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation (2001) 247 ITR 268, the same was applied to interest receipts. 17. He submitted that, from a conjoint reading of Bokaro Steel Ltd (supra) and Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd (supra), it is evident that interest, which is directly linked with setting-up of a project and would reduce the cost of the project, will not be covered by Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals…

MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6692/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand V Mahadeokara.Y:2014-15 Mumbai International Vs. Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Airport Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – Chhatrpati Shivaji 400020. International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) A.Y:2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Vs. Mumbai International Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Airport Ltd., New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, 400020. Chhatrpati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Saurabha Soparkar Virtually Appeared Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand V Mahadeokar, Am: These Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Under Section 250 Of The Mumbai International Airport Ltd., Mumbai Income-Tax Act, 1961 Dated 05.08.2025 In The Case Of The Assessee For Assessment Year 2014–15. The Assessment In The Present Case Was Originally Completed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 30.12.2017. Since The Issues Involved In The Appeals Of The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Arise Out Of The Same Appellate Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 28Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35D

…cost. Mumbai International Airport Ltd., Mumbai 46. The assessee further relied upon various judicial precedents including CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (236 ITR 315), CIT vs. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (243 ITR 2), CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation (247 ITR 268) and Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. CIT (251 ITR 329) to contend that income earned during the construction stage having direct nexus with the project should go to reduce the project cost. 47. The Assessing Officer, however, did not accept the explanation furnished by the assessee. According to the Assessing Officer, the gain aris…

M/S RPJ MINERALS PVT. LTD ,MAIHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1,SATNA, SATNA

ITA 86/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Meena, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 43B

…was submitted that the facts of the assessee's case being similar, the ratio would apply squarely to the facts of the assessee's case. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation (2001) 247 ITR 268 and CIT vs. Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited (2000) 243 ITR 2 (SC). In view of the same, it was pleaded that the additions made by the Assessing Officer was unjustified. The ld. CIT(A) considered the submissions made by the assessee and particularly its submission that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indian Oil 6 ITA No.154/JAB/…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 vs. M/S RPJ MINERALS PRIVATE LTD., SATNA

ITA 154/JAB/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur19 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Meena, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 43B

…was submitted that the facts of the assessee's case being similar, the ratio would apply squarely to the facts of the assessee's case. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation (2001) 247 ITR 268 and CIT vs. Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited (2000) 243 ITR 2 (SC). In view of the same, it was pleaded that the additions made by the Assessing Officer was unjustified. The ld. CIT(A) considered the submissions made by the assessee and particularly its submission that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indian Oil Panipat Power Con…

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Visakhapatnamportauthority Vs. Theasst.Cit -Circle-1(1) Administrative Office Building 4 Th Floor, Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530001 Mvp Road, Beside Post Office Andhra Pradesh-530001. Sector-8, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam – 530017 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.103/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Dy.Cit Vs. Visakhapatnamportauthority Room No. 412, 4 Th Floor Administrative Office Building Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530035 Mvp Double Road Andhra Pradesh Opp. Rythubazar Visakhapatnam – 530014 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)

…to road and should be treated as “buildings” for the purpose of calculation of depreciation. The Ld. DR also submitted that the Ld. AO has also distinguished the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation reported in 247 ITR 268 (SC) relied on by the assessee in support of its claim. Therefore, the Ld. DR pleaded that the order of the Ld. AO be upheld. Per contra, the Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and argued in support of the same. 118. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Author…

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Visakhapatnamportauthority Vs. Theasst.Cit -Circle-1(1) Administrative Office Building 4 Th Floor, Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530001 Mvp Road, Beside Post Office Andhra Pradesh-530001. Sector-8, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam – 530017 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.103/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Dy.Cit Vs. Visakhapatnamportauthority Room No. 412, 4 Th Floor Administrative Office Building Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530035 Mvp Double Road Andhra Pradesh Opp. Rythubazar Visakhapatnam – 530014 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)

…to road and should be treated as “buildings” for the purpose of calculation of depreciation. The Ld. DR also submitted that the Ld. AO has also distinguished the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation reported in 247 ITR 268 (SC) relied on by the assessee in support of its claim. Therefore, the Ld. DR pleaded that the order of the Ld. AO be upheld. Per contra, the Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and argued in support of the same. 118. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Author…

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 463/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…reduce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on: CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC) Hire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and interest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts which would go to reduce the capital cost. CIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC) Assessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes and…

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 462/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…reduce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on: CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC) Hire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and interest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts which would go to reduce the capital cost. CIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC) Assessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes and…

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 461/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…reduce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on: CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC) Hire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and interest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts which would go to reduce the capital cost. CIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC) Assessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes and…

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

ITA 460/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2016-17
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…duce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars\nLtd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on:\nCIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC)\nHire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and\ninterest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts\nwhich would go to reduce the capital cost.\nCIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC)\nAssessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes…

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. BARMER LIGNITE MINING COMPANY LIMITED, UDYOG BHAWAN, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 455/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…reduce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on: CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC) Hire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and interest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts which would go to reduce the capital cost. CIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC) Assessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes and…

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. BARMER LIGNITE MINING COMPANY LIMITED, UDYOG BHAWAN, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 454/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…reduce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on: CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC) Hire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and interest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts which would go to reduce the capital cost. CIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC) Assessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes and…

DCIT, CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JPR vs. BARMER LIGNITE MINING COMPANY LIMITED, UDYOG BHAWAN JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 453/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…reduce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on: CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC) Hire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and interest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts which would go to reduce the capital cost. CIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC) Assessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes and…

DCIT, CIRCLE-6 JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. BARMER LIGNITE MINING COMPANY LIMITED, UDYOG BHAWAN, TILAK NAGAR JPR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 452/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…reduce the capital asset. Respectfully, following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. 236 ITR 315 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 309 and further relying on: CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. 247 ITR 268 (SC) Hire charges for plant and machinery given to contractors for use in construction work and interest on advances made to them. These are receipts in the nature of capital receipts which would go to reduce the capital cost. CIT vs. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 426 (SC) Assessee was engaged in manufacture of multi-layer tubes and…

NLC INDIA LTD.,CUDDALLORE vs. DCIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE-8(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 793/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.791, 792 & 793/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2010-11 & 2012-13 V. M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, Block-1, Corporate Office, Ncc-8(1), Neyveli, Chennai. Cuddalore-607 801. [Pan: Aaacn 1121 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Krishna Lassya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.791, 792 & 793/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2010-11 & 2012-13 v. M/s. NLC India Ltd., The DCIT, Block-1, Corporate Office, NCC-8(1), Neyveli, Chennai. Cuddalore-607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. Krishna Lassya, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Responden…

NLC INDIA LTD.,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE-8(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 792/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.791, 792 & 793/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2010-11 & 2012-13 V. M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, Block-1, Corporate Office, Ncc-8(1), Neyveli, Chennai. Cuddalore-607 801. [Pan: Aaacn 1121 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Krishna Lassya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.791, 792 & 793/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2010-11 & 2012-13 v. M/s. NLC India Ltd., The DCIT, Block-1, Corporate Office, NCC-8(1), Neyveli, Chennai. Cuddalore-607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. Krishna Lassya, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Responden…

NLC INDIA LTD.,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT, NON-ORPORTE CIRCLE-8(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 791/CHNY/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.791, 792 & 793/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2010-11 & 2012-13 V. M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, Block-1, Corporate Office, Ncc-8(1), Neyveli, Chennai. Cuddalore-607 801. [Pan: Aaacn 1121 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Krishna Lassya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.791, 792 & 793/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2010-11 & 2012-13 v. M/s. NLC India Ltd., The DCIT, Block-1, Corporate Office, NCC-8(1), Neyveli, Chennai. Cuddalore-607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. Krishna Lassya, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Responden…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

…to road and should be treated as “buildings” for the purpose of calculation of depreciation. The Ld. DR also submitted that the Ld. AO has also distinguished the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation reported in 247 ITR 268 (SC) relied on by the assessee in support of its claim. Therefore, the Ld. DR pleaded that the order of the Ld. AO be upheld. Per contra, the Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and argued in support of the same. 118. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Author…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 200/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

…to road and should be treated as “buildings” for the purpose of calculation of depreciation. The Ld. DR also submitted that the Ld. AO has also distinguished the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation reported in 247 ITR 268 (SC) relied on by the assessee in support of its claim. Therefore, the Ld. DR pleaded that the order of the Ld. AO be upheld. Per contra, the Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and argued in support of the same. 118. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Author…

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 193/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

…to road and should be treated as “buildings” for the purpose of calculation of depreciation. The Ld. DR also submitted that the Ld. AO has also distinguished the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnataka Power Corporation reported in 247 ITR 268 (SC) relied on by the assessee in support of its claim. Therefore, the Ld. DR pleaded that the order of the Ld. AO be upheld. Per contra, the Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and argued in support of the same. 118. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Author…

Showing 1–20 of 124 · Page 1 of 7

CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation (247 ITR 268) — Cited in 124 Judgments | BharatTax