CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd.

383 ITR 217Supreme Court of India2016#507 most cited

What is CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. authority for?

The Supreme Court determines the eligibility of subsidies for deduction under industrial incentive sections, specifically 80IB and 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

186

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Meghalaya Steels Ltd. · CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. · section 80IB deduction · section 80IC deduction · subsidy eligibility for deduction · industrial incentive deduction · Income Tax Act 1961 · deduction of subsidy · Supreme Court subsidy · 383 ITR 217

Also reported as

67 Taxmann.com 158

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 80IBSection 2(24)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 1961Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhc(3)section 115jasection 80hhsection 80hsection 80hhcsection 28(iv)section 80ibsection 115jb(2)section 80icsection 80iasection 80ideduction under section 80ia

Judgments citing CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. K C INDIA LIMITED, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 2889/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalacit, Vs. Kc India Ltd. Room No. 316A, Cr A-6, Nimiri Commercial Building, I.P. Estate, Complex Ashok Vihar, New Delhi – 110002 Phase-Ii, Delhi – 110052 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaack4893N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. SatyajeetGoel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 8O

…ase REC mechanism is repealed / expires than the Renewable Energy Manufacturer can switch over to preferential tariff mechanism. 7.3 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 67taxmann.com 158 (SC)/[2016] 238 Taxman 559 (SC)/[20161 383 ITR 217 (SC)/[2016] 284 CTR 321 (SC)[09-03- 2016] held that Section 80-IB, read with section 80-IC, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Profits and gains from industrial undertakings other than infrastructure development undertakings (Computation of deduction) - Assessment year 2004-05 - Assessee claimed deduction for (a) transport subsidy: (b) in…

M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms

C.A. No.-000152-000152 - 2026Supreme Court09 Jan 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 47

…f the computation of business profits. Although that case concerned the deduction of fluctuation losses, its reasoning underscores that real income under Section 28 may accrue without any conventional “transfer”. 22 (1996) 222 ITR 344 (SC) 23 (2016) 383 ITR 217 (SC) 24 (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC) 31 15.3. It therefore emerges that Section 28 is a comprehensive charging provision designed to bring within the tax net all real profits and gains arising in the course of business, whether convertible into money or received in money or in kind, and irrespective of whether such accrual or receipt of inco…

DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

ITA 5417/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…d. held that nature of any subsidy is to be determined with respect to the purpose for which is granted. Time of disbursal and source/mode of subsidy is immaterial. We have noted that ld. CIT(A) has rightly distinguished the decision of Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (383 ITR 217) of Hon’ble Apex Court concluding that in the impugned case, the issue was as to whether subsidy is admissible for deduction under section 80IB/80IC or not. The issue of capital receipt vs revenue receipts was not agitated there. The ld. CIT(A) after examining various documents placed by the assessee held that the ITA Nos. 5416 & 5417/Del/2017 al…

DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

ITA 5416/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…d. held that nature of any subsidy is to be determined with respect to the purpose for which is granted. Time of disbursal and source/mode of subsidy is immaterial. We have noted that ld. CIT(A) has rightly distinguished the decision of Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (383 ITR 217) of Hon’ble Apex Court concluding that in the impugned case, the issue was as to whether subsidy is admissible for deduction under section 80IB/80IC or not. The issue of capital receipt vs revenue receipts was not agitated there. The ld. CIT(A) after examining various documents placed by the assessee held that the ITA Nos. 5416 & 5417/Del/2017 al…

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

ITA 3158/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…d. held that nature of any subsidy is to be determined with respect to the purpose for which is granted. Time of disbursal and source/mode of subsidy is immaterial. We have noted that ld. CIT(A) has rightly distinguished the decision of Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (383 ITR 217) of Hon’ble Apex Court concluding that in the impugned case, the issue was as to whether subsidy is admissible for deduction under section 80IB/80IC or not. The issue of capital receipt vs revenue receipts was not agitated there. The ld. CIT(A) after examining various documents placed by the assessee held that the ITA Nos. 5416 & 5417/Del/2017 al…

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

ITA 3157/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…d. held that nature of any subsidy is to be determined with respect to the purpose for which is granted. Time of disbursal and source/mode of subsidy is immaterial. We have noted that ld. CIT(A) has rightly distinguished the decision of Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (383 ITR 217) of Hon’ble Apex Court concluding that in the impugned case, the issue was as to whether subsidy is admissible for deduction under section 80IB/80IC or not. The issue of capital receipt vs revenue receipts was not agitated there. The ld. CIT(A) after examining various documents placed by the assessee held that the ITA Nos. 5416 & 5417/Del/2017 al…

ACIT (CIR.) - 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BHANDAR POWER LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1908/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Bhandar Power Ltd. Income Tax, 14Th Floor, Essar House, Circle 6(1)(2), 11, K. K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400034 (Pan: Aaacb6693B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta, Fca & Shri Tarang Mehta, Advocate Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Delhi, Vide Order Dated 25.01.2018 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Ito 6(1)(4), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 20.12.2016, For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Of Deduction U/S 80Ia Of The Income Tax Act Of Rs. 203,13,43,740/-Without Considering The Fact That The Provisions Of Section 801A(10) Is Clearly Attracted In This Case Hence The Assessee Is Not Eligible For Claiming Deduction U/S 801A Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, FCA and Shri Tarang Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 801ASection 801A(10)Section 80I

…on'ble Supreme Court and High Courts to conclude that income received by the assessee has direct nexus with the business of the eligible undertaking. He followed the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT(A) vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd., 383 ITR 217 (SC) and at the same time distinguished the judicial precedents relied upon by the ld. Assessing Officer. 7. Aggrieved by the outcome of the first appellate order, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal contending that decision rendered by ld. CIT(A) in favour of the assessee is without going into the substance of the PPA and without analysing…

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 6950/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate and Ms. Saisudha Multani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

…n para 2 it noted that “The issue raised in this appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Limited [2008] 306 ITR 392/174 taxman 87, or in the alternate, in CIT vs Meghalaya Steels Limited [2016] 383 ITR 217/238 taxтап 559 /67 taxmanno.com 158 (SC).…

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMELRY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 5344/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

…n para 2 it noted that “The issue raised in this appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Limited [2008] 306 ITR 392/174 taxman 87, or in the alternate, in CIT vs Meghalaya Steels Limited [2016] 383 ITR 217/238 taxтап 559 /67 taxmanno.com 158 (SC).…

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 7028/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

…n para 2 it noted that “The issue raised in this appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Limited [2008] 306 ITR 392/174 taxman 87, or in the alternate, in CIT vs Meghalaya Steels Limited [2016] 383 ITR 217/238 taxтап 559 /67 taxmanno.com 158 (SC).…

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 7027/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

…n para 2 it noted that “The issue raised in this appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Limited [2008] 306 ITR 392/174 taxman 87, or in the alternate, in CIT vs Meghalaya Steels Limited [2016] 383 ITR 217/238 taxтап 559 /67 taxmanno.com 158 (SC).…

DCIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. UNITED PHOPHOURUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNWON AS SEARCH CHEM INDL. LTD), MUMBAI

ITA 6807/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

…n para 2 it noted that “The issue raised in this appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Limited [2008] 306 ITR 392/174 taxman 87, or in the alternate, in CIT vs Meghalaya Steels Limited [2016] 383 ITR 217/238 taxтап 559 /67 taxmanno.com 158 (SC).…

DCIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDL.L TD), MUMBAI

ITA 6709/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

…n para 2 it noted that “The issue raised in this appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this court in CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Limited [2008] 306 ITR 392/174 taxman 87, or in the alternate, in CIT vs Meghalaya Steels Limited [2016] 383 ITR 217/238 taxтап 559 /67 taxmanno.com 158 (SC).…

MAYUR DYECHEM INTERMEDIATES LLP,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground No. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 231/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 234BSection 270ASection 40Section 40A(2)Section 80I

…nsidered a revenue receipt, it should still be eligible for the deduction under Section 80IA as income generated from the business of power generation. The assessee placed reliance on the Supreme Court ruling in the case of CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. [2016] 383 ITR 217, in which it was held that that income from activities directly related to business operations should be treated as qualifying income for the purposes of claiming deductions under Section 80IA of the Act. The REC Scheme Document was also placed before us for our reference. 6. In response, the Ld. DR placed reliance on the observations made by th…

ASST CIT CC 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3534/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘K’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1787/Mum/2006 (AY: 2002-03)(Appeal in quantum assessment) CO No. 257/MUM/2006(AY: 2002-03) (Arising out of ITA NO 1822/MUM/2006) ITA No. 6224/Mum/2010 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in quantum assessment) ITA No. 3878/Mum/14 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) (Physical hearing) M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. ACIT, CC-38, Room no. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, Vs. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Road, PAN: AAACU 3440 P Mumbai-4…

ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMLERY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6236/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘K’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1787/Mum/2006 (AY: 2002-03)(Appeal in quantum assessment) CO No. 257/MUM/2006(AY: 2002-03) (Arising out of ITA NO 1822/MUM/2006) ITA No. 6224/Mum/2010 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in quantum assessment) ITA No. 3878/Mum/14 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) (Physical hearing) M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. ACIT, CC-38, Room no. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, Vs. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Road, PAN: AAACU 3440 P Mumbai-4…

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6224/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘K’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1787/Mum/2006 (AY: 2002-03)(Appeal in quantum assessment) CO No. 257/MUM/2006(AY: 2002-03) (Arising out of ITA NO 1822/MUM/2006) ITA No. 6224/Mum/2010 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in quantum assessment) ITA No. 3878/Mum/14 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) (Physical hearing) M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. ACIT, CC-38, Room no. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, Vs. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Road, PAN: AAACU 3440 P Mumbai-4…

THE ACIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. M/S. UNITED PHOSPHOROUS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1822/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘K’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1787/Mum/2006 (AY: 2002-03)(Appeal in quantum assessment) CO No. 257/MUM/2006(AY: 2002-03) (Arising out of ITA NO 1822/MUM/2006) ITA No. 6224/Mum/2010 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in quantum assessment) ITA No. 3878/Mum/14 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) (Physical hearing) M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. ACIT, CC-38, Room no. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, Vs. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Road, PAN: AAACU 3440 P Mumbai-4…

M/S. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD(NOW KNOWN AS UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD),MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CEN CIR-38, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1787/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘K’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1787/Mum/2006 (AY: 2002-03)(Appeal in quantum assessment) CO No. 257/MUM/2006(AY: 2002-03) (Arising out of ITA NO 1822/MUM/2006) ITA No. 6224/Mum/2010 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in quantum assessment) ITA No. 3878/Mum/14 (AY: 2003-04) (Appeal in penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) (Physical hearing) M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. ACIT, CC-38, Room no. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, Vs. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Road, PAN: AAACU 3440 P Mumbai-4…

ALPA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee company is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 457/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Sri PVSS Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Sri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 3Section 80Section 80I

…1 Alpla India Private Limited vs. DCIT ITA 457/Hyd/2022 आयकर अपीलीय "यायािधकरण म", हैदराबाद ‘ए’ ब"च, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मधुसूदन साविडया, माननीय लेखा सद"य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 457/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Alpla India Private Limited, VS. Deputy Commissioner of Income Hyderabad. Tax, PAN: AAFCA3145M Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent) करदाता का "ितिनिध"/ Assessee : Sri PVSS Pr…

Showing 1–20 of 186 · Page 1 of 10

...