CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd.

210 ITR 1High Court1994#6898 most cited
17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)(a)section 94section 38section 80hsection 80hhcsection 80hhsection 43(1)block of assetsadditional depreciationtax benefitsection 41(1)put to use

Judgments citing CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd.

M/S SANOFI INDIA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1606/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…der the head income from House Property and not as income from business (No such reclassification from AY 2005-06 in the assessment). Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the identical issue has been decided in the case of CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd., (1994) 210 ITR 1 (Del) and the Hon'ble High Court has decided the issue in favour of the Page No.| 78 ITA.NO.1606 & 1302/MUM/2007 (A.Y: 2003-04) ITA.NO.1128/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 2003-04) ITA.NO. 5939 & 6548/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2004-05) ITA.NO. 6745/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) M/s. Sanofi India Ltd assessee. Ld. AR of the assessee requested the principle laid down by the Hon'ble…

ACIT- 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MM/S SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1302/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…der the head income from House Property and not as income from business (No such reclassification from AY 2005-06 in the assessment). Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the identical issue has been decided in the case of CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd., (1994) 210 ITR 1 (Del) and the Hon'ble High Court has decided the issue in favour of the Page No.| 78 ITA.NO.1606 & 1302/MUM/2007 (A.Y: 2003-04) ITA.NO.1128/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 2003-04) ITA.NO. 5939 & 6548/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2004-05) ITA.NO. 6745/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) M/s. Sanofi India Ltd assessee. Ld. AR of the assessee requested the principle laid down by the Hon'ble…

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD. ,NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRCLE- 1 , THANE

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 720/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD. ,NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRCLE- 1 , THANE

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 719/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

DCIT CIRCLE-1, THANE vs. M/S EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 652/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1 ,, THANE vs. EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 1424/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA Nos. 652 & 1424/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-1, Thane M/s Everest Industries Limited. Room No. 22, B-Wing 6th floor, G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. PAN No. AAACE 7550 N Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 719 & 720/MUM/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Everest Industries Limited, Dy. CIT, Circle-1 D-206, Sector-63, Noida-201301…

MAX FINANCIAL SERVICE LIMITED ,NAWANSHAHR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is therefore partly allowed

ITA 121/ASR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Mar 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak ChopraFor Respondent: Smt.Prabhjot Kaur, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…his regard to the following decisions: 1) Jamdeshpur Engineering & Machine Manufacturing Company, 32 ITR 41 2. CIT Vs. Delhi Cloth & General Mills (1966) 59 ITR 152 3. CIT Vs. Mcleod & Co.,(1993) 203 ITR 290 (Cal) 4) CIT Vs. Modi Industries Limited,(1994) 210 ITR 1 (Del)(FB) 5) CIT Vs. New India Maritime Agencies (1994) 207 ITR 392(Mad) 13 A.Y.2015-16 16. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee stated that all the facts being duly disclosed to the AO and the AO having taken a possible view on the issue, there was no error in the order of the AO merely because the Ld. Pr.CIT entertained another view on the issue…

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 291/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 69C

…Co. (supra), the Tribunal has carefully considered the question of allowability of depreciation in circumstances similar to the case before us. Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions of the Tribunal and having regard to the decision reported in (1995) 210 ITR 1 1 8 (All) (supra), we feel that the claim of the assessee for depreciation and interest paid to third parties has to be allowed. The Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to allow these claims in relation to the assessment year under consideration after verifying the factual details." In this Judgment also, the judgment of Allahabad High Court…

ACUITY HOLDINGS PVT.LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT -12(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 4011/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JotwaniFor Respondent: Shri Satish Chandra Rajore

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBERAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.4011/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Acuity Holdings Pvt. Ltd. A.M. Bhatkal & Associates, C.As C–1/5, Sarathi CHS Ltd. ……………. Appellant Khira Nagar, S.V. Road Santacruz (W), Mumbai 400 054 PAN – AAFCM3366D v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–12(1)(1), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Prakash Jotwani Revenue by : Shri Satish Chandra Rajore Date of Hearing – 28.08.2019 Date of Order – 22.11.2019 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. The capti…

CENTRAL DISPOSITORY SERVICES (INDIA) LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 2(1)(1),

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 918/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2012-13 D/Acit 2(1)(1), Central Depository Services Mumbai. (India) Ltd., Vs. 17Th Floor, P J Towers, Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai 400 023. Pan Aaacc6233A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Central Depository Services Acit 2(1)(1), (India) Ltd., Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai 400 023. Pan Aaacc6233A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yash ParmarFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(2)Section 2Section 22

…een used as guest house therefore, there is no reason to compute ALV of the property to be taxable u/s. 22 of the Income tax Act, 1961. In this regard reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Modi Industries Ltd. (210 ITR 1). The learned AR further submitted that the learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the expenses being depreciation on the building and maintenance expenses, which was used for the purpose of business without appreciating the fact that the said premises was used as guest house to accommodate its outstation employees, who regularly visit Mumbai for offi…

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL DEPOSITORY SERVICES (I) LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1129/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2012-13 D/Acit 2(1)(1), Central Depository Services Mumbai. (India) Ltd., Vs. 17Th Floor, P J Towers, Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai 400 023. Pan Aaacc6233A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Central Depository Services Acit 2(1)(1), (India) Ltd., Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai 400 023. Pan Aaacc6233A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yash ParmarFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(2)Section 2Section 22

…een used as guest house therefore, there is no reason to compute ALV of the property to be taxable u/s. 22 of the Income tax Act, 1961. In this regard reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Modi Industries Ltd. (210 ITR 1). The learned AR further submitted that the learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the expenses being depreciation on the building and maintenance expenses, which was used for the purpose of business without appreciating the fact that the said premises was used as guest house to accommodate its outstation employees, who regularly visit Mumbai for offi…

ASST CIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. STUISH CAPITAL SERVICES P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5482/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5482/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Asst. Cit-1(3)(1), M/S. Stuish Capital Services Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 540, 5Th Floor, Rajabahadur Compound, बनाम/ Bldg. No. 5, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 43-Tamarind Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcp 1674 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Arju Garodia ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Prakash K. Jotwani सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.05.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 21.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 30.06.2016 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Holding That The Assessee Is Entitled To Claim Depreciation On Premises Owned By It & Used For The Residence Of The Director? 2. Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit (A) Erred In Holding That The Assessee Is Entitled To Such Depreciation Even Without

For Appellant: Ms. Arju GarodiaFor Respondent: Shri Prakash K. Jotwani
Section 143(3)

…ied that quarters built by the employers for the accommodation of their employees must be regarded as buildings used for business and thus eligible for depreciation. 6.3 The AO further relied on the judgment of Delhi High Court in case of Modi Industries Ltd. 210 ITR 1, in which it has been held that the word 'occupy' refers to occupation directly by the assessee or through an employees and occupation by an employee was held eligible for depreciation for the purpose of carrying on of business. 6.4 He further relied upon the ITAT Kolkata bench in case of Arjun Associates P Ltd., in which it has been held that once…

SARANG & ASSOCIATES,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 36, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 31/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Sarang & Associates Vs. Dcit Cen Cir 36, 302, Shabnam Apartment Mumbai 33, S.V.Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400 058 Pan/Gir No. Aaafs0638J Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…the entire building, the assessee has carried out repair and renovation and incurred these expenses of Rs.49, 60,053/-. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Modi Industries Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 467 (Delhi) wherein Hon'ble High Court held that insofar as purchase of pumping sets, Mono block pump with HP Motors and two transformers is concerned, they were not stand alone equipments, but were the part of bigger plant. Therefore, it would be treated as replacement of those parts when they are not used independently and the expenditure would be…

SARANG & ASSOCIATES,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 36, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1961/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am M/S Sarang & Associates, Dy. Commissioner Of Income 302, Shabnam Apartment, 33, Tax, Central Circle-36, S.V. Road, Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai. Mumbai-58 Pan No.Aafs0638J .. Appellant Respondent Assessee By .. Shri. Piyush Chhajed, Ar .. Revenue By Miss. Arju Garodia, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 24-11-2016 .. Date Of Pronouncement 24-11-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 30

…entire building, the assessee has carried out repair and renovation and incurred these expenses of Rs.49, 60,053/-. The learned Counsel for the assessee 4 relied on the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Modi Industries Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 467 (Delhi) wherein Hon’ble High Court held that insofar as purchase of pumping sets, Mono block pump with HP Motors and two transformers is concerned, they were not stand alone equipments, but were the part of bigger plant. Therefore, it would be treated as replacement of those parts when they are not used independently and the expenditure would be…

SURINDER MADAN

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/364/2013HC Delhi22 Aug 2013
Section 260ASection 30

…lation of entire flooring of 9000 sq. ft. in the entire building with new flooring is not covered under the expression „current repairs‟. It is a case of complete replacement and change. 16. In Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Modi Industries Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 467 (Del.), old cell room was completely demolished and new cell room was constructed, it was held that the expenditure was “capital” in nature. In the said case there is an observation that relaying of worn out flooring of print shop may amount to “current repairs” as was observed in CIT vs. Delhi Press Samachar Patra (P) Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 5…

C.I.T vs. MAHARASHTRA SEAMLESS LTD

Appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 804 / 2007HC Delhi30 Nov 2009
Section 80H

…out was subservient and incidental to the main business. Holding that such an income would be treated as business income, the Tribunal relied upon the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Modi Industries Ltd., 210 ITR 1 as well as that of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal v. National Newsprint and Papers Ltd., 114 ITR 388. The Supreme Court has taken similar view in Universal Plast Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 237 ITR 454. - 6. We, thus, find that to this extent no question of law arises for account for the purpose of dedu…

C.I.T vs. MAHARASHTRA SEAMLESS LTD

Appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 820 / 2007HC Delhi30 Nov 2009
Section 80H

…out was subservient and incidental to the main business. Holding that such an income would be treated as business income, the Tribunal relied upon the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Modi Industries Ltd., 210 ITR 1 as well as that of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal v. National Newsprint and Papers Ltd., 114 ITR 388. The Supreme Court has taken similar view in Universal Plast Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 237 ITR 454. - 6. We, thus, find that to this extent no question of law arises for determination. However, the impo…