CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd.

383 ITR 217Supreme Court of India2016#450 most cited

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

Subsidies and excise duty refunds that are accounted for in the Profit and Loss account are revenue in nature, form part of business income, and are eligible for deductions under Section 80IB/80IC. Such receipts cannot be reduced from the block of assets for depreciation calculation.

203

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. · Section 80IB · Section 80IC · subsidy · excise duty refund · revenue receipt · business income · depreciation · P&L account

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
Read the full judgment

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.

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…

M/S. Jaiprakash Power Ventures Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

ITA 3723/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Dcit, M/S, Jaiprakash Power Ventures Ltd., Circle-2, 113, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. M/S, Dcit, Jaiprakash Power Circle-2, Ventures Ltd., Dehradun Juit, Complex, Waknaghat, Post Office- Dumehar Bani, Kandaghat, Distt. Solan, Himachal Pradesh Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Anil K. Chopra, Ca Sh. Sanjiv Choudhary, Ca Sh. V.K. Garg, Adv. Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.05.2025

Section 143(3)Section 801A

…ent in this factual backdrop is that it’s interest income deserves to be treated under the “business” head only; which in turn, qualifies for section 80I deduction herein, since “derived” from the eligible business going by CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 217 (SC) etc. The Revenue’s vehement plea is that both the learned lower authorities have rightly rejected the assessee’s claim in entirety as per CIT(A)’s detailed discussion. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing vehement rival submissions. We make it clear first of all that this 13 | P a g e ITA Nos.3064/Del/2013; 3925/De…

M/S. Jaiprakash Power Ventures Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

ITA 3064/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Dcit, M/S, Jaiprakash Power Ventures Ltd., Circle-2, 113, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. M/S, Dcit, Jaiprakash Power Circle-2, Ventures Ltd., Dehradun Juit, Complex, Waknaghat, Post Office- Dumehar Bani, Kandaghat, Distt. Solan, Himachal Pradesh Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Anil K. Chopra, Ca Sh. Sanjiv Choudhary, Ca Sh. V.K. Garg, Adv. Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.05.2025

Section 143(3)Section 801A

…ent in this factual backdrop is that it’s interest income deserves to be treated under the “business” head only; which in turn, qualifies for section 80I deduction herein, since “derived” from the eligible business going by CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 217 (SC) etc. The Revenue’s vehement plea is that both the learned lower authorities have rightly rejected the assessee’s claim in entirety as per CIT(A)’s detailed discussion. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing vehement rival submissions. We make it clear first of all that this 13 | P a g e ITA Nos.3064/Del/2013; 3925/De…

DCIT, Dehradun vs. M/S Jai Prakash Power Venture Ltd., H.P

ITA 3929/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Dcit, M/S, Jaiprakash Power Ventures Ltd., Circle-2, 113, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. M/S, Dcit, Jaiprakash Power Circle-2, Ventures Ltd., Dehradun Juit, Complex, Waknaghat, Post Office- Dumehar Bani, Kandaghat, Distt. Solan, Himachal Pradesh Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Anil K. Chopra, Ca Sh. Sanjiv Choudhary, Ca Sh. V.K. Garg, Adv. Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.05.2025

Section 143(3)Section 801A

…ent in this factual backdrop is that it’s interest income deserves to be treated under the “business” head only; which in turn, qualifies for section 80I deduction herein, since “derived” from the eligible business going by CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 217 (SC) etc. The Revenue’s vehement plea is that both the learned lower authorities have rightly rejected the assessee’s claim in entirety as per CIT(A)’s detailed discussion. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing vehement rival submissions. We make it clear first of all that this 13 | P a g e ITA Nos.3064/Del/2013; 3925/De…

M/S. Jaiprakash Power Ventures Ltd., H.P vs. DCIT, Dehradun

ITA 3925/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Dcit, M/S, Jaiprakash Power Ventures Ltd., Circle-2, 113, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. M/S, Dcit, Jaiprakash Power Circle-2, Ventures Ltd., Dehradun Juit, Complex, Waknaghat, Post Office- Dumehar Bani, Kandaghat, Distt. Solan, Himachal Pradesh Pan: Aaacj5463 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Anil K. Chopra, Ca Sh. Sanjiv Choudhary, Ca Sh. V.K. Garg, Adv. Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.05.2025

Section 143(3)Section 801A

…ent in this factual backdrop is that it’s interest income deserves to be treated under the “business” head only; which in turn, qualifies for section 80I deduction herein, since “derived” from the eligible business going by CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 217 (SC) etc. The Revenue’s vehement plea is that both the learned lower authorities have rightly rejected the assessee’s claim in entirety as per CIT(A)’s detailed discussion. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing vehement rival submissions. We make it clear first of all that this 13 | P a g e ITA Nos.3064/Del/2013; 3925/De…

M/S Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5451/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ITA No. 5251 to 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14]; ITA No. 4492/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2014-15] M/s Jindal Photo LtdVs.The A.C.I.T IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5251/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07] ITA No. 5252/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2007-08] ITA No. 5253/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2008-09] ITA No. 5254/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2009-10] ITA No. 5255/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2010-11] ITA No. 5256/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2011-12] ITA No. 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14] ITA No. 449…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5254/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ITA No. 5251 to 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14]; ITA No. 4492/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2014-15] M/s Jindal Photo LtdVs.The A.C.I.T IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5251/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07] ITA No. 5252/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2007-08] ITA No. 5253/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2008-09] ITA No. 5254/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2009-10] ITA No. 5255/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2010-11] ITA No. 5256/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2011-12] ITA No. 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14] ITA No. 449…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5253/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…ITA No. 5251 to 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14]; ITA No. 4492/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2014-15] M/s Jindal Photo LtdVs. The A.C.I. T IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E' BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5251/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07] ITA No. 5252/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2007-08] ITA No. 5253/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2008-09] ITA No. 5254/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2009-10] ITA No. 5255/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2010-11] ITA No. 5256/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2011-12] ITA No. 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14] ITA No. 449…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr vs. M/S Greenply Industries Limited

ITA/6/2023HC Gauhati03 Mar 2025

Bench: Honourable The Chief Justice Honourable Mr. Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 Date Of Judgment & Order : 04.03.2025

For Respondent: B SARMA, DR. ASHOK SARAF,MR P BARUAH,MR. N N
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 260A

…oys(supra) by holding that the appeal was covered against the Revenue by the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.(supra) and in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd., reported in (2016) 6 SCC 747. 25. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, thereafter, in its decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Kolhapur v. Chaphalkar Brothers, Pune, reported in (2018) 13 SCC 358; had an occasion to again consider its earlier decision in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd.(supra) and Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (supra); and had concluded…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(2), Delhi, I.P.Estate vs. Bureau Veritas Consumer Products Services(India) Pvt. Ltd., Lajpat Nagar

ITA 3158/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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…

The Dy CIT CC-38, Mumbai vs. M/S. United Phosphourous Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4099/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt.Renu Jauhri, Accountan Member

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ese sections. Other relevant decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court relevant to these sections are as under: 1. M/s. Topman Exports v/s CIT, Mumbai (2012) 342 ITR 49 (SC) 2. M/s. PlastiblendsIndia Ltd. v/s. ACITAIR(SC) (2017)5633 3. CIT v/s Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 383 ITR 217 (SC) 14.5 We find that the order of the Ld. AO as well as of the Ld. CIT(A) is required to be examined in the light of principles laid down by the Apex Court in the above cited decisions. For example, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shah Originals (supra) has held that the gain from foreign exchange fluctuation did not fall within the meaning of 'deriv…

M/S. Housing Develop, Ment Finance Corpn. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Addl CIT RG-1(1), Mumbai

ITA 287/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)

…ing decisions where subsidies, interest income etc., have been considered as "profits derived from business of the undertaking," and submitted that the same analogy should hold good for the impugned incomes in assessee's case (i) CIT vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 383 ITR 217 (ii) CIT vs. Jagdishprasad M. Joshi 318 ITR 420 (iii) Tema Exchangers Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT being Order dat- ed 18.07.2018 in ITA No. 415 of 2004 (iv) CIT vs. Shree Balaji Alloys 287 CTR 459 (v) Continental Construction Ltd. vs. CIT 195 ITR 81 (vi) ACIT vs. Nahavasheva International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. in Order dated 28.09.201…

Rajesh Kumar Drolia (HUF) vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - III, Kolkata

ITA/27/2012HC Calcutta07 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 80I

…1 A.F.R. OD – 1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax] ORIGINAL SIDE ITA/27/2012 RAJESH KUMAR DROLIA (HUF) VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-III), KOLKATA BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ Date : 7th May, 2024 Appearance : Sri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Sri Sanjay Bhowmik, Adv. Smt. Swapna Das, Adv. ...for the appellant. Sri Aryak Dutta, Adv. ...for the respondent. 1. This appeal relating to assessment year 2005-06 has been filed by the appellant/asses…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Candor Gurgaon One Reality Project Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 1647/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80I

…see stands clearly established. Accordingly, the interest income earned thereon would be eligible for deduction u/s 80IAB of the Act. This view is further fortified by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Meghalaya Steel Ltd reported in 383 ITR 217 (SC). Hence we hold that interest income on fixed deposits would be eligible for deduction u/s 80IAB of the Act in the instant case. 13. However, with regard to other non-operating income of Rs 71,600/- is concerned, the assessee had not furnished any details regarding the same proving the business nexus of such receipt. No arguments were even a…

Candor Gurgaon One Reality Projects Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-5(2), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 1635/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80I

…see stands clearly established. Accordingly, the interest income earned thereon would be eligible for deduction u/s 80IAB of the Act. This view is further fortified by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Meghalaya Steel Ltd reported in 383 ITR 217 (SC). Hence we hold that interest income on fixed deposits would be eligible for deduction u/s 80IAB of the Act in the instant case. 13. However, with regard to other non-operating income of Rs 71,600/- is concerned, the assessee had not furnished any details regarding the same proving the business nexus of such receipt. No arguments were even a…

Neel Kanth Gum and Chemicals, Jhunjhunu vs. ACIT, Circle Jhunjhunu, Income Tax Office, Jhunjhunu

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 805/JPR/2023[A.Y. 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Apr 2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 801Section 80I

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Mk0 ehBk yky ehuk] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & DR MITHA LAL MEENA, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 805/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 M.s, Neelkanth Gum and Chemicals cuke The ACIT Vs. Near Railway Station Circle-Jhunjhunu Sardarshahar,Churu – 331403 (Raj) Jhunjhunu LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFN 6786C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri G.S. Mehta, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@R…

Chiripal Industries Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 708/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 708/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Chirpal Industries Limited, D.C.I.T, Chirpal House, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2), Shivranjani Cross Road, Ahmedabad. Satellight, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aaacc8513B

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr.DR
Section 116JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, अहमदाबादनयायपीी IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 708/AHD/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Chirpal Industries Limited, D.C.I.T, Chirpal House, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2), Shivranjani Cross Road, Ahmedabad. Satellight, Ahmedabad-380015. PAN: AAACC8513B (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Biren Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Ankit Jain, Sr.DR सुिवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/03/2024 घोरणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 02/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED,…

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 2200/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…thing has been brought on record by the Ld. CIT-DR to interfere Uflex Ltd. Vs ACIT & ACIT vs. Uflex Ltd. 15 with the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 217(SC). Hence, we have no reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, ground No. 3 of the Revenue is dismissed. 33. In its appeal for AY 2012-13 the Revenue has taken Ground No. 3 relating to export incentive receipt of Rs. 66,883/-which has been held by the Ld. CIT(A) as part of sale proceeds and hence an allowable deduct…

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 2199/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…thing has been brought on record by the Ld. CIT-DR to interfere Uflex Ltd. Vs ACIT & ACIT vs. Uflex Ltd. 15 with the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 217(SC). Hence, we have no reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, ground No. 3 of the Revenue is dismissed. 33. In its appeal for AY 2012-13 the Revenue has taken Ground No. 3 relating to export incentive receipt of Rs. 66,883/-which has been held by the Ld. CIT(A) as part of sale proceeds and hence an allowable deduct…