CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd.

320 ITR 546Supreme Court of India2010#2567 most cited

What is CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd. authority for?

The process of duplicating computer discs by recording software on a blank disc amounts to ‘manufacture’ for the purposes of income tax law.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd. · Oracle Software India Ltd. · 320 ITR 546 · manufacture · manufacturing · definition of manufacture · computer software · duplicating discs · recording software · section 80I · section 80IB · section 32A

Issues it is cited on

section 32ainitial assessment yearsection 80ibsection 80isection 260gross total incomesection 32section 26section 80salaryprevious yearsection 25

Judgments citing CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd.

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,KALA AMB vs. ITO, SIRMOUR

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 61/CHANDI/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

…every change was not a manufacture, despite the fact that every change is an article is the result of a treatment of labour and manipulation. However this test of manufacture needed to be seen in the context of the above process. The assessee relied upon: i) 320 ITR 546 (SC), ii) 204 ITR 412 (SC), iii) 162 ITR 846 (SC) and few other judgments of High Courts i.e; (a) 209 ITR 854 (Cal), (b) 119 ITR 895 (All). The assessee asailed the order of the Ld. AO in treating only the manufacturing of “ feeder clamps” as manufacture and not others and hence the grievance. The assessee with regard to welding of ladders and ac…

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,SIRMOUR vs. ADDL. CIT, SOLAN

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 388/CHANDI/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

…every change was not a manufacture, despite the fact that every change is an article is the result of a treatment of labour and manipulation. However this test of manufacture needed to be seen in the context of the above process. The assessee relied upon: i) 320 ITR 546 (SC), ii) 204 ITR 412 (SC), iii) 162 ITR 846 (SC) and few other judgments of High Courts i.e; (a) 209 ITR 854 (Cal), (b) 119 ITR 895 (All). The assessee asailed the order of the Ld. AO in treating only the manufacturing of “ feeder clamps” as manufacture and not others and hence the grievance. The assessee with regard to welding of ladders and ac…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4642/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…l” marketability of the processed product i.e., processed Lean Gas/ Natural Gas in this case, as laid down in various judicial precedents, which are as under: i. UOI v. J. G. Glass Industries Ltd.: (1998) 97 ELT 5 (SC) ii. CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd.: 320 ITR 546 (SC) of the word “manufacture”. The Supreme Court held as under: Kores India Limited vs. CCE: 2004 (174) ELT 7 (SC) India Cine Agencies vs. CIT: 308 ITR 98 ITO v. Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd.: 320 ITR 79/ 227 CTR 513 CIT vs Emptee Poly-Yarn (P) Ltd: 320 ITR 665 (SC) CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd.: 396 ITR 696, Puttur Petro Pr…

GAIL (INDIA) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT-LTU DELHI, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4454/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…l” marketability of the processed product i.e., processed Lean Gas/ Natural Gas in this case, as laid down in various judicial precedents, which are as under: i. UOI v. J. G. Glass Industries Ltd.: (1998) 97 ELT 5 (SC) ii. CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd.: 320 ITR 546 (SC) of the word “manufacture”. The Supreme Court held as under: Kores India Limited vs. CCE: 2004 (174) ELT 7 (SC) India Cine Agencies vs. CIT: 308 ITR 98 ITO v. Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd.: 320 ITR 79/ 227 CTR 513 CIT vs Emptee Poly-Yarn (P) Ltd: 320 ITR 665 (SC) CIT vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd.: 396 ITR 696, Puttur Petro Pr…

STRIDES ARCOLAB LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIR 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8614/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Strides Shasun Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Strides Income Tax Circle 10(3), Arcolab Limited) 201, Mumbai Vs. Devavrata, Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aadcs8104P

For Appellant: Percy J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Jayant Kumar &
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 1O

…would tantamount to manufacture of production of articles or things. Their Lordships held as under at para 31 of the judgments after considering the Apex court judgments in the case of N.C. Budharaja & Co. (supra) and CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 546/187 Taxman 275. '31. Having analyzed the submissions of learned counsel of both the parties and the material available for our perusal and the cited case law, we find force in the submissions of Mr. Vohra, learned counsel for the assessee. No doubt, the raw material i.e. the primary input in the impugned activity is the "information" but can 24…

DCIT 3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA AIRPORT DEVELOPEMENT. CO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1586/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumard C I T - 3(2)(1) M/S. Maharashtra Airport Room No. 674, 6Th Floor Development Co. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 12Th Floor, World Trade Mumbai 400020 Centre Tower No. 1 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Appellant Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year:2008-09) M/S. Maharashtra Airport D C I T - 3(2)(1) Development Co. Ltd. Room No. 674, 6Th Floor 12Th Floor, World Trade Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Centre Tower No. 1 Mumbai 400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Cross Objector Appellant In Appeal Revenue By: Shri Abhijit Patankar Assesseeby: Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri Sumit Lal Chandani Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.05.2018 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Jm The Aforesaid Appeal Of The Department & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 11.12.2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai For A.Y. 2008-09. Ita No. 1586/Mum/2016 – A.Y. 2008-09 2. The Basic Grievance Of The Department In This Appeal Is Against The Decision Of The Learned Cit(A) In Holding The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter “The Act”) As Bad In Law & Void.

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor &For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…& Investment Pvt. Ltd. 320 ITR St. 24 (SC) (iii) Motilal R. Todi vs. ACIT (2016) 47 ITR (T) 49 (Mum) (iv) Golden Tobacco Ltd. vs. JCIT (2016) 48 ITR (T) 132 (Mum) (v) Indu Lata Rangwala vs. DCIT (2016) 384 ITR 337 (Del) (vi) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 546 (SC) (vii) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) 7. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon. The undisputed facts are that the assessee filed its return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act claiming deduction under Section 80IAB. The ret…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 41, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ANMOL TEXTILES,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2031/KOL/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2031/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle-41, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Anmol Textiles [Pan: Aadfn 4059 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Srihari, CITFor Respondent: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate
Section 10BSection 133ASection 14Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 9

…ty and has a separate market. It was held that the assessee was engaged in manufacturing of bidis entitled to deduction u/s80 HH & 801. (vii)The concept of manufacture was further explained by Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Oracle Software India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 546(SC) where it was held that after operation/process rendered a commodity fit for use for which it would otherwise not be fit, the operation or the process would fall within the meaning of the word manufacture. In that case, the assessee was undertaking an operation which rendered the blank CD fit for use for the purpose for which it would otherwis…

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 872/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ing Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309 (SC) – case of Ship breaking, India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 208 ITR 98 (SC) – conversion of Jumbo rolls of photographic films into small flats and rolls of different sizes, CIT vs Oracle Software India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 546 (SC) – duplication of blank CD into recorded CD, CIT vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79 (SC) – sawing marble blocks into slabs and tiles and polishing CIT vs Emptee Poly Tarn Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 665 (SC) and CIT vs Yashasvi Yarn Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 208 (SC) – twisting and texturising partially oriented yarn through ther…

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 871/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ing Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309 (SC) – case of Ship breaking, India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 208 ITR 98 (SC) – conversion of Jumbo rolls of photographic films into small flats and rolls of different sizes, CIT vs Oracle Software India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 546 (SC) – duplication of blank CD into recorded CD, CIT vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79 (SC) – sawing marble blocks into slabs and tiles and polishing CIT vs Emptee Poly Tarn Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 665 (SC) and CIT vs Yashasvi Yarn Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 208 (SC) – twisting and texturising partially oriented yarn through ther…

DCIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1002/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ing Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309 (SC) – case of Ship breaking, India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 208 ITR 98 (SC) – conversion of Jumbo rolls of photographic films into small flats and rolls of different sizes, CIT vs Oracle Software India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 546 (SC) – duplication of blank CD into recorded CD, CIT vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79 (SC) – sawing marble blocks into slabs and tiles and polishing CIT vs Emptee Poly Tarn Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 665 (SC) and CIT vs Yashasvi Yarn Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 208 (SC) – twisting and texturising partially oriented yarn through ther…

DCIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1001/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ing Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309 (SC) – case of Ship breaking, India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 208 ITR 98 (SC) – conversion of Jumbo rolls of photographic films into small flats and rolls of different sizes, CIT vs Oracle Software India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 546 (SC) – duplication of blank CD into recorded CD, CIT vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79 (SC) – sawing marble blocks into slabs and tiles and polishing CIT vs Emptee Poly Tarn Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 665 (SC) and CIT vs Yashasvi Yarn Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 208 (SC) – twisting and texturising partially oriented yarn through ther…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ALLIANZ BIOSCIENCES PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result appeals of the Revenue for both the relevant assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11 are partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 2226/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: 12.04.2017
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 250(6)Section 73Section 80I

…on of an article or thing. Similarly, in ITO vs. Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd {320 ITR 79), the Supreme Court held that conversion of marble bloc s into polished slabs and tiles amounted to manufacture or production. In CIT vs. Oracle Software India Ltd(320 ITR 546) the Supreme Court held that the process of transforming the blank or compact disc if to software loaded disc amounts to manufacture . While in CIT vs. Empee Poly-yarn Pvt. Ltd (320 ITR 665), the Supreme Court held that twisting and texturising of partially oriented yarn by thermo mechanical process which converts it into a texturised yarn amount…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ALLIANZ BIOSCIENCES PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result appeals of the Revenue for both the relevant assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11 are partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 2225/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: 12.04.2017
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 250(6)Section 73Section 80I

…on of an article or thing. Similarly, in ITO vs. Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd {320 ITR 79), the Supreme Court held that conversion of marble bloc s into polished slabs and tiles amounted to manufacture or production. In CIT vs. Oracle Software India Ltd(320 ITR 546) the Supreme Court held that the process of transforming the blank or compact disc if to software loaded disc amounts to manufacture . While in CIT vs. Empee Poly-yarn Pvt. Ltd (320 ITR 665), the Supreme Court held that twisting and texturising of partially oriented yarn by thermo mechanical process which converts it into a texturised yarn amount…

BISWAJIT DAS,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 493/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 10Section 10BSection 2

…me Court has also decided following cases in which also, in our opinion, similar issue whether processing is manufacture or production has been decided. These decisions are given as under:- i) India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 (SC) ii) Oracle Software India Ltd. 320 ITR 546 (SC) iii) Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (SC). 45.6 We noted that in all these decisions except in the case of Oracle Software the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 271 ITR 331 was referred to by the court. Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of ''CIT Vs. Abhishek Industries Ltd. 286 IT…

ITO, WARD-2(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. BISWAJIT DAS, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 473/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 10Section 10BSection 2

…me Court has also decided following cases in which also, in our opinion, similar issue whether processing is manufacture or production has been decided. These decisions are given as under:- i) India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 (SC) ii) Oracle Software India Ltd. 320 ITR 546 (SC) iii) Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (SC). 45.6 We noted that in all these decisions except in the case of Oracle Software the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 271 ITR 331 was referred to by the court. Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of ''CIT Vs. Abhishek Industries Ltd. 286 IT…

ACIT CIRCLE 40 (1) vs. RANJEET SINGH,

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 419/DEL/2007[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2016AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit/Ito, Vs. Inter Globe Technology Quoteint Pvt. Ltd. Circle-11(1), Ground Floor 124, Central Wing, New Delhi. Thapar House, Janpath, New Delhi. (Pan: Aabci3241H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shriajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Rupesh Jain & Aditya Vohra, Adv. Department By: Shri Vijay Verma, Cit( Dr) Date Of Hearing : 09 .05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 26 :07.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Revenue Has Questioned First Appellate Order In All The Above Appeals Solely On The Ground That The Learned Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition (Of Rs.27,83,45,741 In Assessment Year 2007-08, Rs.90,53,50,969 In Assessment Year 2008-09, Rs. 70,35,36,948 In Assessment Year 2009-10 & Rs.98,56,91,361 In Assessment Year 2010-11) Made On Account Of Disallowance Of Deduction Claimed Under Sec. 10Aa Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2 2. Heard & Considered The Arguments Advanced By The Parties In View Of Orders Of The Authorities Below, Material Available On Record & The Decisions Relied Upon.

For Appellant: S/ShriAjay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Rupesh JainFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT( DR)
Section 10A

…(A.Y. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) – order dated 23.11.2015; iv) Acquire Services (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service-tax, Delhi – 48 Taxman.com 269; v ) DCIT vs. Goenka Diamond & Jewellers Ltd. – 146 TTJ 68 (Jaipur); & vi) Oracle Software India Ltd. (2010) – 320 ITR 546 (SC); vii) LI & Fung India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT – 305 ITR 105 (Del.); viii) CIT vs. M.L. Outsourcing Services (P) Ltd. (2014) – 271 CTR 553 (Del.); ix) Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. & Anr. (2011) – 333 ITR 440 (Del.); 16 6. In rejoinder, the Learned CIT(DR) reiterated that assessee is a local marketing agent doing business in India for Galileo. The servi…

M/S. FIBERFILL ENGINEERS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1853/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri A.T. Varkey:Asstt. Yr: 2010-11 M/S Fiberfill Engineers Vs. Acit Circle 38(1), C-9/9574, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. New Delhi-110070. (New Circle 63(1),Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aaaff 6313 P ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Gautam Jain Adv. P. Kamal Adv. Respondent By : Smt. Rehka Vimal Dr Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2016. Date Of Order : 25/02/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Rehka Vimal DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 22(1)Section 22(3)Section 54Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…e denied that signage has separate commercial use and, therefore, assessee was carrying out manufacturing activity as contemplated u/s 80IC. In this regard he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Oracle Software India Ltd. 320 ITR 546 (SC), wherein in para 16 it has been observed: 16. If one reads the judgment in Tata Consultancy Services', it becomes clear that the intelligence/logic (contents) of a programme do not change. They remain the same, be it in the original or in the copy. The Department- needs to take into account the ground realities of the business and sometimes…

CIT-7

ITA/190/2015HC Delhi09 Dec 2015
Section 260ASection 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…. Order of the ITAT 11. The Assessee then appealed to the ITAT by filing ITA No. 2186/Del/ 2012. In the impugned order allowing the Assessee's appeal, the ITAT relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Oracle Software India Limited (2010) 320 ITR 546 (SC) and held that “the radio programmes consist of editorial and specific stanza of the songs and the same is first recorded then edited and then broadcasted.” Further, “guest/callers etc. would have their questions and answers/interviews/suggestions etc. recorded at an 2015:DHC:10063-DB ITA 190/2015 Page 6 of 15 e…

Commissioner of Income Tax – I

ITA/551/2013HC Delhi05 Feb 2015
Section 10B

…uction under Section 10A/10B.‖ 17. The aforesaid passage refers to a number of decisions on the said subject. However, we would like to refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax versus Oracle Software India Limited, (2010) 320 ITR 546, in which the controversy was whether the assessee was a manufacturer and thus entitled to deduction under Section 80 IA. The Supreme Court interpreted the term ―manufacture‖ and held that the process of commercial duplication of software requires four steps. Installation/transfer of virtual image of the software on the recordable m…

ORACLE SOFTWARE INDIA LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL

ITA/797/2006HC Delhi25 Nov 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

…$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 287/2008, 417/2009, 447/2009, 461/2009, 683/2009 Reserved on: 2"^ September, 2013 Date of decision: 25^'' November, 2013 ORACLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Appellant Through Mr. M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Husnal Syali Nagi, Mr. Mayanlc Nagi and Mr. Harkunal Anand, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Respondent Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel & Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate. INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 797/2006, 951/2006, 961/2006, 390/2007 ORACLE SOFTWARE INDIA LIMITED Appellant Through Mr. M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate with Ms…

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3

CIT v. Oracle Software India Ltd. (320 ITR 546) — Cited in 45 Judgments | BharatTax