CIT v. Kothari Sugar & Chemical Ld

242 ITR 456High Court2000#20149 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 37(1)Section 43(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Kothari Sugar & Chemical Ld

DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HINDUSTAN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4446/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-3(1), Mumbai M/S. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…he case of CIT Vs. Madurantakam Cooperative Sugar Mills ltd. (2004) 138 taxman.com 150 held that provision made for molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. Further, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kothari Sugar & Chemical Ld. (2000) 242 ITR 456 (Mad) held that amount set apart by assesse for credit to molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras also in the case of CIT Vs. Salem Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. (1997) 95 taxman.com 325 (Mad) held that amount transferred to Molasses Storage Fund for providing adequate storage facility could not be included i…

BAJAJ HINDUSTAN LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3714/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-3(1), Mumbai M/S. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…he case of CIT Vs. Madurantakam Cooperative Sugar Mills ltd. (2004) 138 taxman.com 150 held that provision made for molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. Further, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kothari Sugar & Chemical Ld. (2000) 242 ITR 456 (Mad) held that amount set apart by assesse for credit to molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras also in the case of CIT Vs. Salem Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. (1997) 95 taxman.com 325 (Mad) held that amount transferred to Molasses Storage Fund for providing adequate storage facility could not be included i…

ADDL CIT 3(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HINDUSTAN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed

ITA 5208/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhacit-3(1)(1) Vs. M/S Bajaj Hindustan Room No. 607, 6 Th Floor, Sugar Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, ( Ea R L I E R K N O W N A S M / S B A J A J H I N D U S T A N L T D ) Bajaj Bhavan, 2 Nd Floor, M.K. Road, Jamanalal Bajaj, Marg- Mumbai – 400 020 226, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb4351J Appellant .. Respondent M/S Bajaj Hindustan Vs. Acit-3(1)(1) Sugar Ltd. Room No. 607, 6 Th Floor, ( Ea R L I E R K N O W N A S M / S B A J A J H I N D U S T A N L T D ) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 2 Nd Floor, M.K. Road, Jamanalal Bajaj, Marg- Mumbai – 400 020 226, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb4351J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Mahesh Akhade
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…he case of CIT Vs. Madurantakam Cooperative Sugar Mills ltd. (2004) 138 taxman.com 150 held that provision made for molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. Further, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kothari Sugar & Chemical Ld. (2000) 242 ITR 456 (Mad) held that amount set apart by assesse for credit to molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras also in the case of CIT Vs. Salem Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. (1997) 95 taxman.com 325 (Mad) held that amount transferred to Molasses Storage Fund for providing adequate storage facility could not be included i…

BAJAJ HINDUSTAN LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed

ITA 5058/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhacit-3(1)(1) Vs. M/S Bajaj Hindustan Room No. 607, 6 Th Floor, Sugar Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, ( Ea R L I E R K N O W N A S M / S B A J A J H I N D U S T A N L T D ) Bajaj Bhavan, 2 Nd Floor, M.K. Road, Jamanalal Bajaj, Marg- Mumbai – 400 020 226, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb4351J Appellant .. Respondent M/S Bajaj Hindustan Vs. Acit-3(1)(1) Sugar Ltd. Room No. 607, 6 Th Floor, ( Ea R L I E R K N O W N A S M / S B A J A J H I N D U S T A N L T D ) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 2 Nd Floor, M.K. Road, Jamanalal Bajaj, Marg- Mumbai – 400 020 226, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb4351J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Mahesh Akhade
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…he case of CIT Vs. Madurantakam Cooperative Sugar Mills ltd. (2004) 138 taxman.com 150 held that provision made for molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. Further, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kothari Sugar & Chemical Ld. (2000) 242 ITR 456 (Mad) held that amount set apart by assesse for credit to molasses storage fund is allowable deduction. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras also in the case of CIT Vs. Salem Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. (1997) 95 taxman.com 325 (Mad) held that amount transferred to Molasses Storage Fund for providing adequate storage facility could not be included i…

CIT v. Kothari Sugar & Chemical Ld (242 ITR 456) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax