CIT v. Manav Tools (India) P. Ltd.

336 ITR 237High Court#17690 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Manav Tools (India) P. Ltd.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4081/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: PendingITAT Delhi12 Mar 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

…ty drawback accrues in the year in which rate is fixed by the competent authority after verification of claim of the assessee and amount is quantified and not in the year of export. Similar view has been held in the case of CIT v. Manav Tools (India) P. Ltd: 336 ITR 237 (P&H). It has been held similarly by the Delhi High Court in assessee's own case for assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-00, 2001-02 and 2004-05. 18. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment orders. 19. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…uty drawback accrues in the year in which rate is fixed by the competent authority after verification of claim of the assessee and amount is quantified and not in the year of export. Similar view has been held in the case of CIT v. Manav Tools (India) P. Ltd: 336 ITR 237 (P&H). It has been held similarly by the Delhi High Court in assessee’s own case for assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-00, 2001-02 and 2004-05. 18. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment orders. 30 19. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Delhi High Cour…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…r of assessee in the assessment years 1999-00, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2004-05, 2005-06, AY 2006-07 and 2007-08, the issue stands covered in favour of the assessee, in view of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the cases of CIT v. Manav Tools (India) P. Ltd: 336 ITR 237 (P&H) and CIT v. Sriyansh Knitters P. Ltd. 336 ITR 235 wherein the High Court while affirming the finding of the Tribunal held that duty drawback accrues in the year in which rate is fixed by the competent authority after verification of claim of the assessee and amount is quantified and not in the year of export. 3.10. Per contra, it is the con…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “I-1” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI L.P. SAHU Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., vs. Additional CIT, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAACM0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, CAs Department by:Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR) C O R R I G E N D U M It has come to our notice that there are few typographical mistakes in the Order dated 20.5.2016 of the ITAT, which needs…

Crompton Greaves Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT -6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company in ITA no

ITA 2836/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar"ी शैल" कुमार यादव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ी रिमत कोचर, लेखाकार सद"य के सम" । आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1994/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2836/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Crompton Greaves बनाम/ Cit – 6,Mumbai, Ltd.,6Th Floor, C.G. House, 5Th Floor, V. Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 030. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacc3840K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep N. Kapasi Revenue By : Shri C.W. Angolkar सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29-10-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-02-2016

For Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar

Section 143(3)Section 263

…arlier years , this expenditure was claimed and allowed by the A.O.. Therefore, there is no reason for taking a different view for this assessment year and it is against the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Gopal Purohit, 336 ITR 237 (Bom-HC) and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC). The assessee company also relied on decision of Kolkata Tribunal in the case of Hamilton Research and Technologies (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2005) 142 Taxman 79 (Mag)(Kol)(Trib) in support and contended that even on estimate basis if provision for warrant…