CIT v. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd.

57 ITR 36Supreme Court of India1965#3453 most cited

What is CIT v. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd. authority for?

Consideration received for the sale or transfer of an entitlement or accretion of capital, such as surplus loom hours, is a capital receipt and not taxable income.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd. · 57 ITR 36 · capital receipt · business income · exploitation of capital asset · transfer of loom hours · carbon credit

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd.

SRF LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ADDL CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 774/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Ussrf Limited Vs. Acit Unitech Crest, Greenwood Range – 9, City Block – C, Sector – 45, Ltu, New Delhi Gurgaon – 122 003 Pan No. Aaacs 0206 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Shri R. K. Kapoor C.A. Shri Ravi Kumar Revenue By Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit (Dr) Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2016 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, New Delhi [For Short, Cit(A)] Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short, 'The Act'] For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under:-

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92C

…on, carbon credit is entitlement or accretion of capital and hence income earned on sale of these credits is capital receipt. For this proposition, we place reliance on the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd. (57 ITR 36) wherein held that transfer of surplus loom hours to other mill out of those allotted to the assessee under an agreement for control of production was capital receipt and not income. Being so, the consideration received by the assessee is similar to consideration received by transferring of loom hours. The Supreme Court considered this fact and obs…

M/S QUALITY APPAREL EXPORTERS PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 11(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the Ground No

ITA 2352/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 2352 & 2353/Mum/2019 (A.Y: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Quality Apparel Vs. Ito -Ward -11(1)(1) Exports Pvt Ltd, Room No. 201, Unit No.4, Wicel Bldg, 2Ndfloor,Aayakar Seepz, Midc, Moral, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai Mumbai – 400020 400093 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacq1711F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Mr.T.Shankar.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 04.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Are The Appeals Filed The By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.T.Shankar.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…not income from house property. The appellant further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court namely CIT Vs. Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd (1988) 169 ITR 597, Cept Vs Shri Laxmi Silk Mills (1951) 20 ITR 451 and CIT Vs. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd (1965) 57 ITR 36 and CIT Vs Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd. (1988) 169 ITR 597 and contended that rent income should not be taxed as Income from House Property. 4.3.2 After examining the explanation of the appellant and the contention of the Assessing Officer I am of the view that in the assessment order the Assessing Officer contended, the appellant was the owner of the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. SUBHASH KABINI POWER CORPORATION LIMITED, BANGALORE

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

ITA 350/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year :2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Subhash Kabini Power Corporation Ltd., Wing South Portion, Cristu Complex, 5Th Income Tax, Circle – 6(1)(2), Floor, No.41/7, Lavelle Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru–560 001. Pan : Aaccs 0881 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ravi Tulsiyan, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : .03.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravi Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80

…nion. carbon credit is entitlement or accretion of capital and hence income earned on sale of these credits is capital receipt. For this proposition, we place reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd. (57 ITR 36) wherein held that transfer of surplus loom hours to other mill out of those allotted to the assessee under an agreement for control of production was capital receipt and not income. Being so, the consideration received by the assessee is similar to consideration received by transferring of loom hours. Hie Supreme Court considered this fact and obs…

Showing 120 of 35 · Page 1 of 2