CIT v. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd.

57 ITR 36Supreme Court of India1965#3408 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 366,005 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

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 28(iv)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80IASection 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 115psection 28(iv)bona fide mistakepurposive interpretationsection 32(1)(iia)depreciation on goodwillintangible assetssection 2(24)ddtbook profitsput to usededuction under section 80ia

Judgments citing CIT v. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd.

The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Gandhinagar vs. Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd., Gandhinagar

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1462/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad1. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1462/Ahd/2016 2.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1463/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively)

For Appellant: Shri O.P.Sharma, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Bhavin Marfatiya, AR
Section 14A

…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. [1965] 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. ITA Nos.1462 & 1463/Ahd/2016 Jt. CIT (OSD) vs. Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. Asst.Years – 2010-11 & 2011-12 Being so, the consideration received by the assessee i…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1764/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘B’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15] Dabur Invest Corp Vs. The Pr.C.I.T - 16 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan New Delhi 10, Rouse Avenue New Delhi PAN: AADFD 2529 G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv Shri Chandan Aggarwal, CA Department By : Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv [Special Counsel] Shri Keshav Saxena, PCIT-DR Shri S.R. Senapati, Addl. CIT Shri Suvinay K. Dash, Adv. Date of Hearing : 29.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 11.03.2019 ORD…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1763/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘B’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15] Dabur Invest Corp Vs. The Pr.C.I.T - 16 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan New Delhi 10, Rouse Avenue New Delhi PAN: AADFD 2529 G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv Shri Chandan Aggarwal, CA Department By : Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv [Special Counsel] Shri Keshav Saxena, PCIT-DR Shri S.R. Senapati, Addl. CIT Shri Suvinay K. Dash, Adv. Date of Hearing : 29.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 11.03.2019 ORD…

DCIT 9(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6704/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./6704/Mum/2016, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy. Cit 9(3)(1) M/S. Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power Pvt. 215, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Ltd. Mumbai - 400020 Vs. 6-Shiv Vastu, Tejpal Scheme Road No.5, Vile Parle (E),Mumbai - 400057 Pan:Aaacd7612A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari-Dr Assessee By: Shri Pankaj K. Jain-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/06/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2018 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य,राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 24.08.2016 Of Cit(A)-16, Mumbai,The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal. Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Generation Of Hydro Electric Power, Filed Its Return Of Income On 21.09.2012, Declaring Total Income At Rs.2.57 Crore, Later On A Revised Return Was Filed On 19.08.2013 Declaring Income At Rs.1.96 Crores.On 25.09. 2013,The Assessee Revised The Return For The Second Time Disclosing Income Of Rs.3.57 Cores. The Ao Completed The Assessment On 28.02.2015,U/S.143(3) Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs. 5.53 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj K. Jain-ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…arbon 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 vs. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 36 (SC)………..In the present case, the assessee transferred the carbon credits like loom hours to some other concerns for certain consideration. Therefore, the receipt of such consideration cannot be considered as business income and it is a capital receipt. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the consideration received on account of carbon credits…

ACIT, Namakkal vs. Jansons Industries Limited, Namakkal

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 615/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri M. Balaganeshआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.613, 614 & 615/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. C. Yamuna, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Subramaniam, CA
Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एम. बालगणेश, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.613, 614 & 615/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s Jansons Industries Ltd., Income Tax, v. No.129, SND Road, Circle – 1, Tiruchangode, Namakkal. Namakkal Dt. – 637 211. PAN : AAACJ 5438 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Smt. C. Yamuna,…

ACIT, Namakkal vs. Jansons Industries Limited, Namakkal

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 614/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri M. Balaganeshआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.613, 614 & 615/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. C. Yamuna, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Subramaniam, CA
Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एम. बालगणेश, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.613, 614 & 615/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s Jansons Industries Ltd., Income Tax, v. No.129, SND Road, Circle – 1, Tiruchangode, Namakkal. Namakkal Dt. – 637 211. PAN : AAACJ 5438 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Smt. C. Yamuna,…

ACIT, Namakkal vs. Jansons Industries Limited, Namakkal

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 613/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri M. Balaganeshआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.613, 614 & 615/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. C. Yamuna, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Subramaniam, CA
Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एम. बालगणेश, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.613, 614 & 615/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s Jansons Industries Ltd., Income Tax, v. No.129, SND Road, Circle – 1, Tiruchangode, Namakkal. Namakkal Dt. – 637 211. PAN : AAACJ 5438 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Smt. C. Yamuna,…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sella Synergy India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 557/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.398/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri. Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Smt. Parminder Kaur, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 5OSection 92C

…relating to treatment of sum received on impairment of a source of business: • Kettlewell Bullen & Co. Vs CIT [1965 AIR 65](SC); • CITVs Vazir Sultan & Sons [361TR 175](SC); • CIT Vs Shaw Wallace & Co [LR 59 lA 206](SC); • CIT Vs Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills [57 ITR 36](SC) and the Transfer Pricing provisions come into play only when an assessee is in receipt of income or claims an expense in relation to a transaction entered into by the assessee with its AE. In the given case, since the receipt from the Transaction relating to Transfer of Software business undertaking constituted a 'capital receipt' in the ha…

Banca Sella S.P.A. Chennai Branch (It Division), Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 417/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.398/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri. Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Smt. Parminder Kaur, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 5OSection 92C

…relating to treatment of sum received on impairment of a source of business: • Kettlewell Bullen & Co. Vs CIT [1965 AIR 65](SC); • CITVs Vazir Sultan & Sons [361TR 175](SC); • CIT Vs Shaw Wallace & Co [LR 59 lA 206](SC); • CIT Vs Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills [57 ITR 36](SC) and the Transfer Pricing provisions come into play only when an assessee is in receipt of income or claims an expense in relation to a transaction entered into by the assessee with its AE. In the given case, since the receipt from the Transaction relating to Transfer of Software business undertaking constituted a 'capital receipt' in the ha…

Sella Synergy India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 398/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.398/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri. Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Smt. Parminder Kaur, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 5OSection 92C

…relating to treatment of sum received on impairment of a source of business: • Kettlewell Bullen & Co. Vs CIT [1965 AIR 65](SC); • CITVs Vazir Sultan & Sons [361TR 175](SC); • CIT Vs Shaw Wallace & Co [LR 59 lA 206](SC); • CIT Vs Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills [57 ITR 36](SC) and the Transfer Pricing provisions come into play only when an assessee is in receipt of income or claims an expense in relation to a transaction entered into by the assessee with its AE. In the given case, since the receipt from the Transaction relating to Transfer of Software business undertaking constituted a 'capital receipt' in the ha…

Sharadamba Enterprises, Hubli vs. Asst.C.I.T., Hubli

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-firm is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1286/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 May 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Sharadama Enterprises, Station Road, Hubli. … Appellant Pan:Abofs 5233 J Vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Hubli. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Naginchand Khincha,CAFor Respondent: Smt.Rukmani Attri, JCIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 40

…stock- Page 7 of 9 in-trade. Therefore, it is a business asset in the hands of the assessee-firm. Exploitation of the business asset would yield only business income as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd. (57 ITR 36), Universal Plasts Ltd. v. CIT (237 ITR 454), CIT Vs. Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd. (169 ITR 597). The assessee-firm has not produced any evidence rebutting the treatment given in the books of account to the building. In the absence of any evidence, it is difficult to hold that rental income is assessable as income from house property. The decisions rel…

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S Subhash Kabini Power Corporation Limited

ITA/169/2015HC Karnataka29 Mar 2016

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 260Section 263Section 80I

…bon 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 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 consi…

ACIT 8(3) (OSD), Mumbai vs. Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power P. Lt, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5932/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sandeep Gosaini.T.A. No.5932/M/2010 (Assessment Year: 2007-2008) फनाभ/ Dcit-8(1), Dodson Lindblom Hydro R.No.210, 2 Nd Floor, Power Pvt Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 6, Shiv Wastu, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 40 020. Tejpal Scheme, Road No.5, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-57. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacd7612A (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) C.O.128/M/11 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.5932/M/2010(Ay: 2007-2008) I.T.A. No.7716/M/2011 (Assessment Year: 2008-2009) I.T.A. No.5933/M/2012 (Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power फनाभ/ Dcit-8(1), R.No.210, 2 Nd Floor, Pvt Ltd., 6, Shiv Wastu, Vs. Tejpal Scheme, Road No.5, Aayakar Bhavan, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-57. M.K. Road, Mumbai–400020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacd7612A (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri Farrokh Irani प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Revenue By : Shri B.S. Bist, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh IraniFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR
Section 80I

…carbon credit is entitlement or accretion f 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 vs. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd [1965] 57 ITR 36 (SC) .............In the present case, the assessee transferred the carbon credits like loom hours to some other concerns for certain consideration. Therefore, the receipt of such consideration cannot be considered as business income and it is a capital receipt. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the consideration received on account of carbon…

DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Calcutta Mumbai Truck Terminal Ltd, Howrah

Accordingly, the ground no. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1189/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri R.S Sahay, FCA,, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, JCIT,ld.DR
Section 143(3)

…/12-C-AM 8 Deptt Vs. M/s. Cal. Mum Truck Terminal Ltd & P.Ltd- commercially exploited by others. In this regard, the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions in support of its contentions:- CIT vs Maheswari Devi Jute Mills Ltdd reported in (1965) 57 ITR 36 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that : “An asset acquired and used for the purpose of the business does not cease to be a commercial asset of that business as soon as it is temporarily put out of use or is let out to another person for use in his business of trade. Receipt by the exploitation of a commercial asset is the profit of the b…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharti Hexacom Ltd

ITA - 1336 / 2010HC Delhi19 Dec 2013

…ue in the said case 2013:DHC:6537-DB ITA 1336/2010 & conn. cases. Page 17 of 46 relied upon an earlier decision of the Supreme court in CIT vs. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 36 (SC), wherein sale of loom hours were held to be in nature of capital receipt and hence not taxable. The said decision was distinguished on several grounds but noticeably it was recorded that the said case had proceeded on a common accepted basis that loom hours was an asset. In Empire Jute Co. Ltd. (supra), on deeper elucidation of relev…