CIT v. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory

294 ITR 631High Court2007#2170 most cited

What is CIT v. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory authority for?

For claiming deduction under section 80IA, the audit report can be filed during the course of or before the completion of assessment proceedings.

53

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory · Section 80IA · audit report · deduction · assessment proceedings · income tax

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 44ABSection 80IASection 250Section 80IA(7)Section 80IBSection 80J(6A)

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(7)section 80j(6a)section 10b(8)section 80iesection 119(1)section 143(1)(a)(v)section 288section 143(1)(a)(ii)section 80ibsection 139(9)section 80jdeduction u/s 80ia

Judgments citing CIT v. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3)., Hyderabad vs. Sai Sudhir Infrastructures Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1383/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…” 20. ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Parmeshwar Cold Storage (P) Ltd vs. ACIT has held that, for claiming deduction u/s 80IB, only condition is that the original return should be filed in time. 21. In the case of CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H), the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that to claim deduction u/s 80IA, it would be sufficient if the audit report is filed during the course of or before completion of the assessment proceedings. 22. We find that these decisions were followed by the CIT (A) to consider the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in t…

Dy. Commsioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3)., Hyderabad vs. Sai Sudhir Infrastructures Limited., Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1382/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…” 20. ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Parmeshwar Cold Storage (P) Ltd vs. ACIT has held that, for claiming deduction u/s 80IB, only condition is that the original return should be filed in time. 21. In the case of CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H), the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that to claim deduction u/s 80IA, it would be sufficient if the audit report is filed during the course of or before completion of the assessment proceedings. 22. We find that these decisions were followed by the CIT (A) to consider the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in t…

Asr Enginering & Projects Limited (Formerly Sai Sudhir Infrastructures Limited), Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1136/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…” 20. ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Parmeshwar Cold Storage (P) Ltd vs. ACIT has held that, for claiming deduction u/s 80IB, only condition is that the original return should be filed in time. 21. In the case of CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H), the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that to claim deduction u/s 80IA, it would be sufficient if the audit report is filed during the course of or before completion of the assessment proceedings. 22. We find that these decisions were followed by the CIT (A) to consider the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in t…

Asr Enginering & Projects Limited (Formerly Sai Sudhir Infrastructures Limited), Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1135/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…” 20. ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Parmeshwar Cold Storage (P) Ltd vs. ACIT has held that, for claiming deduction u/s 80IB, only condition is that the original return should be filed in time. 21. In the case of CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H), the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that to claim deduction u/s 80IA, it would be sufficient if the audit report is filed during the course of or before completion of the assessment proceedings. 22. We find that these decisions were followed by the CIT (A) to consider the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in t…

Asr Enginering & Projects Limited (Formerly Sai Sudhir Infrastructures Limited), Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1134/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…” 20. ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Parmeshwar Cold Storage (P) Ltd vs. ACIT has held that, for claiming deduction u/s 80IB, only condition is that the original return should be filed in time. 21. In the case of CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H), the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that to claim deduction u/s 80IA, it would be sufficient if the audit report is filed during the course of or before completion of the assessment proceedings. 22. We find that these decisions were followed by the CIT (A) to consider the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in t…

Asr Enginering & Projects Limited (Formerly Sai Sudhir Infrastructures Limited), Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1133/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…” 20. ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Parmeshwar Cold Storage (P) Ltd vs. ACIT has held that, for claiming deduction u/s 80IB, only condition is that the original return should be filed in time. 21. In the case of CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H), the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that to claim deduction u/s 80IA, it would be sufficient if the audit report is filed during the course of or before completion of the assessment proceedings. 22. We find that these decisions were followed by the CIT (A) to consider the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in t…

Asr Enginering & Projects Limited (Formerly Sai Sudhir Infrastructures Limited), Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1132/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…” 20. ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Parmeshwar Cold Storage (P) Ltd vs. ACIT has held that, for claiming deduction u/s 80IB, only condition is that the original return should be filed in time. 21. In the case of CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H), the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that to claim deduction u/s 80IA, it would be sufficient if the audit report is filed during the course of or before completion of the assessment proceedings. 22. We find that these decisions were followed by the CIT (A) to consider the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in t…

Nayab International, Vadodara vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1068/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Smiti Samant, Sr.DR
Section 10ASection 10A(5)Section 147Section 1OSection 234BSection 234CSection 271

…Courts taking the same view as under: - (ii) CIT vs. Shivanand Electricals (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom.), (ii) Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 721 (Guj.), (Hi) CIT Vs. Jayant Patel (2001) 248 ITR 199 (Mad.). (iv) CIT Vs Mahalaxmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H). Referring to the aforesaid decisions, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Contimeters Electricals Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 317 ITR 249 (Delhi) has also taken a view that requirement of filing the audit report along with Page 7 of 9 Asstt. Year 2009-10 return is not mandatory but directory, and that if the audit repo…

M/S Unique Builders and Developers (Ajit), Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 249/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: The Itat.

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Ms. Anuradha (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…the High Court of Bombay in CIT v. Shivanand Electronics [1994] 209 ITR 63/ 75 Taxman 93(Bom.), apart from Gujarat High Court in Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT [1996] 219 ITR 721(Guj.) and Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Mahalaxmi Rice Factory [2007] 294 ITR 631/ 163 Taxman 565(Punj. & Har). 7. The Calcutta High Court in the case in the CIT v. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 503/[2003] 126 Taxman 435(Cal.) has ITA 249/JP/2018 5 M/s Unique Builders & Developers (Ajit) Vs. DCIT also concurred with the said view which was followed by the Tribunal in this case. 8. Mr. T. Ravikumar, the learned c…

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. M/S Marathon India Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 287/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: The Ao At The Time Of Assessment Proceedings With A Certificate That The Above Said Forms Had Been Ito Vs. M/S Marathon India Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri B. L. Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 80I

…the High Court of Bombay in CIT v. Shivanand Electronics [1994] 209 ITR 63/ 75 Taxman 93(Bom.), apart from Gujarat High Court in Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT [1996] 219 ITR 721(Guj.) and Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Mahalaxmi Rice Factory [2007] 294 ITR 631/ 163 Taxman 565(Punj. & Har). 7. The Calcutta High Court in the case in the CIT v. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 503/[2003] 126 Taxman 435(Cal.) 5 ITO vs. M/s Marathon India Ltd. has also concurred with the said view which was followed by the Tribunal in this case. 8. Mr. T. Ravikumar, the learned counsel for the appellant is not…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir-2, Ajmer vs. Shri Ramesh Kshetrapal, Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 610/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya & HemangFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 801A(7)Section 80I

…of other Courts taking the same view. The decisions being, CIT v. Shivanand Electricals (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bombay); Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 721 (Guj.); CIT v. Jayant Patel (2001) 248 ITR 199 (Mad) and CIT v. Mahalaxmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H). In view of this long line on decisions of various High Courts in considering the provisions of Section 80J(6A) which are similar to the provisions of Section 80- IA(7), we feel that the Tribunal has arrived at the correct conclusion that the requirement of filing the audit report along with the return is not mandatory but directory and tha…

Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1366/2008HC Delhi02 Dec 2008
For Appellant: Mr. R.D. JollyFor Respondent: None
Section 260ASection 263Section 288Section 80Section 80ISection 80J

…her Courts taking the same view. The decisions being, CIT v. Shivanand Electricals (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bombay); Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 721 (Guj.); CIT v. Jayant Patel (2001) 248 ITR 199 (Mad) and CIT v. Mahalaxmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H). In view of this long line on decisions of various High Courts in considering the provisions of Section 80J(6A) which are similar to the provisions of Section 80-IA(7), we feel that the Tribunal has arrived at the correct conclusion that the requirement of filing the audit report along with the return is not mandatory but directory a…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi Central I vs. Contimeters Electricals P.Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 1366 / 2008HC Delhi02 Dec 2008
For Appellant: Mr. R.D. JollyFor Respondent: None
Section 260ASection 263Section 288Section 80Section 80ISection 80J

…her Courts taking the same view. The decisions being, CIT v. Shivanand Electricals (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bombay); Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 721 (Guj.); CIT v. Jayant Patel (2001) 248 ITR 199 (Mad) and CIT v. Mahalaxmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H). In view of this long line on decisions of various High Courts in considering the provisions of Section 80J(6A) which are similar to the provisions of Section 80-IA(7), we feel that the Tribunal has arrived at the correct conclusion that the requirement of filing the audit report along with the return is not mandatory but directory a…